Impact of enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This individual-patient data meta-analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared with conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically for articles reporting outcomes of ERAS after pancreatoduodenectomy published up to August 2020. Comparative studies were included. Main outcomes were postoperative functional recovery elements, postoperative morbidity, duration of hospital stay, and readmission. RESULTS: Individual-patient data were obtained from 17 of 31 eligible studies comprising 3108 patients. Time to liquid (mean difference (MD) -3.23 (95 per cent c.i. -4.62 to -1.85) days; P < 0.001) and solid (-3.84 (-5.09 to -2.60) days; P < 0.001) intake, time to passage of first stool (MD -1.38 (-1.82 to -0.94) days; P < 0.001) and time to removal of the nasogastric tube (3.03 (-4.87 to -1.18) days; P = 0.001) were reduced with ERAS. ERAS was associated with lower overall morbidity (risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95 per cent c.i. -0.08 to -0.01; P = 0.015), less delayed gastric emptying (RD -0.11, -0.22 to -0.01; P = 0.039) and a shorter duration of hospital stay (MD -2.33 (-2.98 to -1.69) days; P < 0.001) without a higher readmission rate. CONCLUSION: ERAS improved postoperative outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Implementation should be encouraged.

Enhanced recovery protocols consist of interdisciplinary interventions aimed at standardizing care and reducing the impact of surgical stress. They often include a short period of preoperative fasting during the night before surgery, early removal of lines and surgical drains, early food intake and mobilization out of bed on the day of surgery. This study gives a summary of reports assessing such care protocols in patients undergoing pancreatic head surgery, and assesses the impact of these protocols on functional recovery in an analysis of individual-patient data. The study revealed the true benefits of enhanced recovery protocols, including shorter time to food intake, earlier bowel activity, fewer complications after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay compared with conventional care.

Pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy: a worldwide survey among surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this survey was to assess practices regarding pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy on a global basis. METHODS: This survey study among surgeons from eight (inter)national scientific societies was performed according to the CHERRIES guideline. RESULTS: Overall, 236 surgeons completed the survey. ERAS protocols are used by 61% of surgeons and respectively 82%, 93%, 57% believed there is a relationship between pain management, fluid therapy, and thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes. Epidural analgesia (50%) was most popular followed by intravenous morphine (24%). A restrictive fluid therapy was used by 58% of surgeons. Chemical thromboprophylaxis was used by 88% of surgeons. Variations were observed between continents, most interesting being the choice for analgesic technique (transversus abdominis plane block was popular in North America), restrictive fluid therapy (little use in Asia and Oceania) and duration of chemical thromboprophylaxis (large variation). CONCLUSION: The results of this international survey showed that only 61% of surgeons practice ERAS protocols. Although the majority of surgeons presume a relationship between pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes, variations in practices were observed. Additional studies are needed to further optimize, standardize and implement ERAS protocols after pancreatic surgery.

Impact of care pathway adherence on recovery following distal pancreatectomy within an enhanced recovery program.

BACKGROUND: In bowel surgery, adherence to enhanced recovery program (ERP) has been associated with improved recovery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of adherence to ERP elements on outcomes, and identify factors associated with successful recovery following distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS: Data for 376 patients who underwent DP managed within an ERP including 16 perioperative elements were reviewed. Primary endpoint was successful recovery, a composite outcome defined as length of hospital stay≤7 days, no severe complications nor readmissions. RESULTS: Patients had a mean (SD) overall adherence of 76 (14)%. Overall, 166 (44%) patients had a successful recovery. There was a positive association between overall adherence and successful recovery (OR 1.19, 95%CI 1.08-1.31 for every additional element, p = 0.001), while an inverse relationship was found with comprehensive complication index (8% reduction, 95%CI -15 to -2%, p = 0.011). Adherence to postoperative phase interventions had the greatest impact on recovery (OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.13-1.47 for every additional postoperative element; p < 0.001). At multivariable regression, early termination of IV fluids was the only ERP element associated with successful recovery (OR 2.80, 95%CI 1.73-4.54; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Increased adherence to ERP elements was associated with successful early recovery and reduction of postoperative complication severity.

Preventing opioid prescription after major surgery: a scoping review of opioid-free analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Excessive opioid prescribing after surgery has been recognised as a contributor to the current crisis of opioid addiction and overdose. Clinicians may potentially tackle this crisis by using opioid-free postoperative analgesia; however, the scientific literature addressing this approach is sparse and heterogeneous, thereby limiting robust conclusions. A scoping review was conducted to systematically map the extent, range, and nature of the literature addressing postoperative opioid-free analgesia. METHODS: Eight bibliographic databases were searched for studies addressing opioid-free analgesia after a major surgery. We extracted the study characteristics, including design, country, year, surgical procedure(s), and interventions. Results were organised thematically according to surgical specialty and targeted phase of recovery: in hospital (early recovery, ≤24 h after operation; intermediate recovery, >24 h) and post-discharge (late recovery). Reporting was according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement for scoping reviews. RESULTS: We identified 424 studies addressing postoperative opioid-free analgesia. The number of studies conducted in countries where the opioid crisis is primarily focused was remarkably low (USA, n=11 [3%]; Canada, n=5 [1%]). Many RCTs compared opioid-free vs opioid analgesia during hospital stay (n=117), but few targeted analgesia post-discharge (n=8). Studies were predominantly focused on procedures in orthopaedic, general, and gynaecological/obstetric surgery. Limited attention has been directed towards non-pharmacological pain interventions. We did not identify knowledge synthesis studies (i.e. systematic reviews and meta-analyses) focused on the comparative effectiveness of opioid-free vs opioid analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids remain a mainstay analgesic for managing pain after surgery, but alternative analgesia strategies should not be overlooked. This scoping review indicates numerous opportunities for future research targeting opioid-free postoperative analgesia. REVIEW REGISTRATION: http://www.researchregistry.com; ID: reviewregistry576.

Measuring In-Hospital Recovery After Colorectal Surgery Within a Well-Established Enhanced Recovery Pathway: A Comparison Between Hospital Length of Stay and Time to Readiness for Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Hospital length of stay is often used as a measure of in-hospital recovery but may be confounded by organizational factors. Time to readiness for discharge may provide a superior index of recovery. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to contribute evidence for the construct validity of time to readiness for discharge and length of stay as measures of in-hospital recovery after colorectal surgery in the context of a well-established enhanced recovery pathway. DESIGN: This was an observational validation study designed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 100 consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal resection (mean age = 65 y; 57% men; 81% laparoscopic) who participated in a randomized controlled trial were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We tested a priori hypotheses that length of stay and time-to-readiness for discharge are longer in patients undergoing open surgery, with lower physical status, with severe comorbidities, with postoperative complications, undergoing rectal surgery, who are older (≥75 y), who have a new stoma, and who have inflammatory bowel disease. RESULTS: Median time-to-readiness for discharge and length of stay were both 3 days. For both measures, 6 of 8 construct validity hypotheses were supported (hypotheses 1 and 4-8). LIMITATIONS: The use of secondary data from a randomized controlled trial (risk of selection bias) was a limitation. Results may not be generalizable to institutions where patient care is not equally structured. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes evidence to the construct validity of time-to-readiness for discharge and length of stay as measures of in-hospital recovery within enhanced recovery pathways. Our findings suggest that length of stay can be a less resource-intensive and equally construct-valid index of in-hospital recovery compared with time-to-readiness for discharge. Enhanced recovery pathways may decrease process-of-care variances that impact length of stay, allowing more timely discharge once discharge criteria are achieved. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A564.

Ensuring Early Mobilization Within an Enhanced Recovery Program for Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the extent to which the addition of staff-directed facilitation of early mobilization to an Enhanced Recovery Program (ERP) impacts recovery after colorectal surgery, compared with usual care. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Early mobilization is considered an important component of ERPs but, despite guidelines recommendations, adherence remains quite low. The value of dedicating specific resources (eg, staff time) to increase early mobilization is unknown. METHODS: This randomized trial involved 99 colorectal surgery patients in an established ERP (median age 63, 57% male, 80% laparoscopic) randomized 1:1 to usual care (including preoperative education about early mobilization with postoperative daily targets) or facilitated mobilization [staff dedicated to assist transfers and walking from postoperative days (PODs) 0-3]. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients returning to preoperative functional walking capacity (6-min walk test) at 4 weeks after surgery. We also explored the association of the intervention with in-hospital mobilization, time to achieve discharge criteria, time to recover gastrointestinal function, 30-day comprehensive complication index, and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: In the facilitated mobilization group, adherence to mobilization targets was greater on POD0 [OR 4.7 (95% CI 1.8-11.9)], POD1 [OR 6.5 (95% CI 2.3-18.3)], and POD2 [OR 3.7 (95% CI 1.2-11.3)]. Step count was at least 2-fold greater on POD1 [mean difference 843.3 steps (95% CI 219.5-1467.1)] and POD2 [mean difference 1099.4 steps (95% CI 282.7-1916.1)] There was no between-group difference in recovery of walking capacity at 4 weeks after surgery [OR 0.77 (95% CI 0.30-1.97)]. Other outcome measures were also not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In an ERP for colorectal surgery, staff-directed facilitation of early mobilization increased out-of-bed activities during hospital stay but did not improve outcomes. This study does not support the value of allocating additional resources to ensure early mobilization in ERPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02131844.

Goal-directed Fluid Therapy Does Not Reduce Primary Postoperative Ileus after Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate perioperative fluid therapy impairs gastrointestinal function. Studies primarily evaluating the impact of goal-directed fluid therapy on primary postoperative ileus are missing. The objective of this study was to determine whether goal-directed fluid therapy reduces the incidence of primary postoperative ileus after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. METHODS: Randomized patient and assessor-blind controlled trial conducted in adult patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Patients were assigned randomly to receive intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (goal-directed fluid therapy group) or fluid therapy based on traditional principles (control group). Primary postoperative ileus was the primary outcome. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight patients were included and analyzed (goal-directed fluid therapy group: n = 64; control group: n = 64). The incidence of primary postoperative ileus was 22% in the goal-directed fluid therapy and 22% in the control group (relative risk, 1; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.9; P = 1.00). Intraoperatively, patients in the goal-directed fluid therapy group received less intravenous fluids (mainly less crystalloids) but a greater volume of colloids. The increase of stroke volume and cardiac output was more pronounced and sustained in the goal-directed fluid therapy group. Length of hospital stay, 30-day postoperative morbidity, and mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy compared with fluid therapy based on traditional principles does not reduce primary postoperative ileus in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the context of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Its previously demonstrated benefits might have been offset by advancements in perioperative care.

Small bowel obstruction and incisional hernia after laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of comparative trials.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies show contrasting data on the impact of laparoscopy on long-term complications such as the occurrence of small bowel obstruction (SBO) and incisional hernia (IH). The objective of the study was to assess the impact of the laparoscopic approach on the occurrence of SBO and IH after colorectal resection. METHODS: Two trained investigators independently searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials for studies comparing laparoscopy to open surgery for mid- to long-term outcomes after colorectal surgery. No language restriction was set. Sensitivity analyses for study design and quality, conversion rate, type of procedure (colon or rectal surgery), and length of follow-up were performed. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs and 14 non-RCT comparative studies for a total of 6540 patients were included in the analysis. Laparoscopy was associated with a significant reduction in the occurrence of SBO (RR 0.57, [95 %CI 0.42-0.76], 16 trials) and IH (RR 0.60, [95 %CI 0.50-0.72], 19 trials). Sensitivity analysis including only RCTs confirmed the reduction in SBO (RR 0.58, [95 %CI 0.39-0.87], 8 trials), while the difference was close to significance for IH (RR 0.76, [95 %CI 0.56-1.03], 7 trials). Sensitivity analysis including only studies with conversion rate lower than 15 % showed a significant protective effect of laparoscopy for both SBO (RR 0.53, [95 %CI 0.37-0.77], 11 trials) and IH (RR 0.58, [95 %CI 0.47-0.72], 12 trials). No significant difference between laparoscopy and open surgery was found when the analysis was limited to studies with conversion rate >15 % (SBO: RR 0.60 [0.32-1.12], IH: RR 0.70 [0.46-1.06]). Length of follow-up did not substantially impact on results. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery is associated with a significant reduction in both SBO and IH compared to the open approach. A low conversion rate in the laparoscopic group plays a key role for reduction in both SBO and IH.