Association between use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and postoperative complications after gastric surgery for cancer (POWER 4): a nationwide, prospective multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols in gastric cancer surgery remains controversial. METHODS: Multicentre prospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer. Adherence with 22 individual components of ERAS pathways were assessed in all patients, regardless of whether they were treated in a self-designed ERAS centre. Each centre had a three-month recruitment period between October 2019 and September 2020. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were overall postoperative complications, adherence to the ERAS pathway, 30 day-mortality and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 743 patients in 72 Spanish hospitals were included, 211 of them (28.4 %) from self-declared ERAS centres. A total of 245 patients (33 %) experienced postoperative complications, graded as moderate-to-severe complications in 172 patients (23.1 %). There were no differences in the incidence of moderate-to-severe complications (22.3% vs. 23.5%; OR, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.41); P = 0.068), or overall postoperative complications between the self-declared ERAS and non-ERAS groups (33.6% vs. 32.7%; OR, 1.05 (95 % CI, 0.70 to 1.56); P = 0.825). The overall rate of adherence to the ERAS pathway was 52% [IQR 45 to 60]. There were no differences in postoperative outcomes between higher (Q1, > 60 %) and lower (Q4, ≤ 45 %) ERAS adherence quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the partial application of perioperative ERAS measures nor treatment in self-designated ERAS centres improved postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing gastric surgery for cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03865810.

Association between use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and postoperative complications in colorectal surgery in Europe: The EuroPOWER international observational study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Assess the relationship between the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) pathway and routine care and 30-day postoperative outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: European centers (185 hospitals) across 21 countries. PATIENTS: A total of 2841 adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Each hospital had a 1-month recruitment period between October 2019 and September 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Routine perioperative care. MEASUREMENTS: Twenty-four components of the ERAS pathway were assessed in all patients regardless of whether they were treated in a formal ERAS pathway. A multivariable and multilevel logistic regression model was used to adjust for baseline risk factors, ERAS elements and country-based differences. RESULTS: A total of 1835 patients (65%) received perioperative care at a self-declared ERAS center, 474 (16.7%) developed moderate-to-severe postoperative complications, and 63 patients died (2.2%). There was no difference in the primary outcome between patients who were or were not treated in self-declared ERAS centers (17.1% vs. 16%; OR 1.00; 95%CI, 0.79-1.27; P = 0.986). Hospital stay was shorter among patients treated in self-declared ERAS centers (6 [5-9] vs. 8 [6-10] days; OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.78-0.87; P < 0.001). Median adherence to 24 ERAS elements was 57% [48%-65%]. Adherence to ERAS-pathway quartiles (≥65% vs. <48%) suggested that patients with the highest adherence rates experienced a lower risk of moderate-to-severe complications (15.9% vs. 17.8%; OR 0.71; 95%CI, 0.53-0.96; P = 0.027), lower risk of death (0.3% vs. 2.9%; OR 0.10; 95%CI, 0.02-0.42; P = 0.002) and shorter hospital stay (6 [4-8] vs. 7 [5-10] days; OR 0.74; 95%CI, 0.69-0.79; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment in a self-declared ERAS center does not improve outcome after colorectal surgery. Increased adherence to the ERAS pathway is associated with a significant reduction in overall postoperative complications, lower risk of moderate-to-severe complications, shorter length of hospital stay and lower 30-day mortality.

Enhanced Recovery After Emergency Surgery: Utopia or Reality? / Rehabilitación multimodal en cirugía de urgencias: ¿utopía o realidad?

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) constitutes the application of a series of perioperative measures based on the evidence, in order to achieve a better recovery of the patient and a decrease of the complications and the mortality. These ERAS programs initially proved their advantages in the field of colorectal surgery being progressively adopted by other surgical areas within the general surgery and other surgical specialties. The main excluding factor for the application of such programs has been the urgent clinical presentation, which has caused that despite the large volume of existing literature on ERAS in elective surgery, there are few studies that have investigated the effectiveness of these programs in surgical patients in emergencies. The aim of this article is to show ERAS measures currently available according to the existing evidence for emergency surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) - The Evidence in Geriatric Emergency Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Background: Geriatric surgery is rising and projected to continue at a greater rate. There is already concern about the poor outcomes for the emergency surgery in elderly. How to manage the available resources to improve outcomes in this group of patients is an important object of debate. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of applying ERAS pathways to emergency elderly surgical patients. METHOD: Two searches were undertaken for ERAS protocols in elderly patients and emergency surgery, in order to gather evidence in relation to ERAS in geriatric emergency patients. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications, mortality, hospital length of stay and readmission rates. Results: Eighteen studies were included. The majority of patients were older than 70. Elderly patients had fewer postoperative complications and a reduced hospitalization with ERAS compared to conventional care. Emergency surgical patients also had fewer postoperative complications with ERAS compared to conventional care. Hospital stay was reduced in 2 out of 3 studies for emergency surgery. Conclusions: ERAS can be safely applied to elderly and emergency patients with a reduction in postoperative complications, hospitalization and readmission rates. There is evidence to suggest that ERAS is feasible and beneficial for geriatric emergency patients.