Perioperative Patients With Hemodynamic Instability: Consensus Recommendations of the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation.

In November of 2022, the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation held a Consensus Conference on Hemodynamic Instability with invited experts. The objective was to review the science and use expert consensus to produce best practice recommendations to address the issue of perioperative hemodynamic instability. After expert presentations, a modified Delphi process using discussions, voting, and feedback resulted in 17 recommendations regarding advancing the perioperative care of the patient at risk of, or with, hemodynamic instability. There were 17 high-level recommendations. These recommendations related to the following 7 domains: Current Knowledge (5 statements); Preventing Hemodynamic Instability-Related Harm During All Phases of Care (4 statements); Data-Driven Quality Improvement (3 statements); Informing Patients (2 statements); The Importance of Technology (1 statement); Launch a National Campaign (1 statement); and Advancing the Science (1 statement). A summary of the recommendations is presented in Table 1 .

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. RESULTS: Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL. RESULTS: Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Anaesthesia role in enhanced recovery after surgery: a revolution in care outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has revolutionized care outcomes. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of how ERAS changed healthcare outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Development of multidisciplinary evidence-based ERAS guidelines for specific surgical specialties and systematic implementation of these guidelines resulted in improved healthcare outcomes, reduction in length of stay, reduction in complications and improved survival. The value of audit of the outcomes is essential for implementation and to improve healthcare. Healthcare economics analysis related to the implementation of ERAS showed significant cost savings up to a return to investment ratio of more than seven. SUMMARY: ERAS has revolutionized healthcare by developing evidence-based ERAS guidelines and systematic implementation of these guidelines. Audit of outcomes is essential, not only to improve healthcare but also to significantly save healthcare expenditures.

Pilot of rapid implementation of the advanced practice provider in the workflow of an existing tele-critical care program.

Incorporating the advanced practice provider (APP) in the delivery of tele critical care medicine (teleCCM) addresses the critical care provider shortage. However, the current literature lacks details of potential workflows, deployment difficulties and implementation outcomes while suggesting that expanding teleCCM service may be difficult. Here, we demonstrate the implementation of a telemedicine APP (eAPP) pilot service within an existing teleCCM program with the objective of determining the feasibility and ease of deployment. The goal is to augment an existing tele-ICU system with a balanced APP service to assess the feasibility and potential impact on the ICU performance in several hospitals affiliated within a large academic center. A REDCap survey was used to assess eAPP workflows, expediency of interventions, duration of tasks, and types of assignments within different service locations. Between 02/01/2021 and 08/31/2021, 204 interventions (across 133 12-h shift) were recorded by eAPP (nroutine = 109 (53.4%); nurgent = 82 (40.2%); nemergent = 13 (6.4%). The average task duration was 10.9 ± 6.22 min, but there was a significant difference based on the expediency of the task (F [2; 202] = 3.89; p < 0.022) and type of tasks (F [7; 220] = 6.69; p < 0.001). Furthermore, the eAPP task type and expediency varied depending upon the unit engaged and timeframe since implementation. The eAPP interventions were effectively communicated with bedside staff with only 0.5% of suggestions rejected. Only in 2% cases did the eAPP report distress. In summary, the eAPP can be rapidly deployed in existing teleCCM settings, providing adaptable and valuable care that addresses the specific needs of different ICUs while simultaneously enhancing the delivery of ICU care. Further studies are needed to quantify the input more robustly.

Characteristics, Outcomes, and Trends of Patients With COVID-19-Related Critical Illness at a Learning Health System in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to surge in the United States and globally. OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of COVID-19-related critical illness, including trends in outcomes and care delivery. DESIGN: Single-health system, multihospital retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 5 hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System. PATIENTS: Adults with COVID-19-related critical illness who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with acute respiratory failure or shock during the initial surge of the pandemic. MEASUREMENTS: The primary exposure for outcomes and care delivery trend analyses was longitudinal time during the pandemic. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were all-cause death at any time, receipt of mechanical ventilation (MV), and readmissions. RESULTS: Among 468 patients with COVID-19-related critical illness, 319 (68.2%) were treated with MV and 121 (25.9%) with vasopressors. Outcomes were notable for an all-cause 28-day in-hospital mortality rate of 29.9%, a median ICU stay of 8 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 17 days), a median hospital stay of 13 days (IQR, 7 to 25 days), and an all-cause 30-day readmission rate (among nonhospice survivors) of 10.8%. Mortality decreased over time, from 43.5% (95% CI, 31.3% to 53.8%) to 19.2% (CI, 11.6% to 26.7%) between the first and last 15-day periods in the core adjusted model, whereas patient acuity and other factors did not change. LIMITATIONS: Single-health system study; use of, or highly dynamic trends in, other clinical interventions were not evaluated, nor were complications. CONCLUSION: Among patients with COVID-19-related critical illness admitted to ICUs of a learning health system in the United States, mortality seemed to decrease over time despite stable patient characteristics. Further studies are necessary to confirm this result and to investigate causal mechanisms. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

A Systematic Literature Review of Predictive Maintenance for Defence Fixed-Wing Aircraft Sustainment and Operations.

In recent decades, the increased use of sensor technologies, as well as the increase in digitalisation of aircraft sustainment and operations, have enabled capabilities to detect, diagnose, and predict the health of aircraft structures, systems, and components. Predictive maintenance and closely related concepts, such as prognostics and health management (PHM) have attracted increasing attention from a research perspective, encompassing a growing range of original research papers as well as review papers. When considering the latter, several limitations remain, including a lack of research methodology definition, and a lack of review papers on predictive maintenance which focus on military applications within a defence context. This review paper aims to address these gaps by providing a systematic two-stage review of predictive maintenance focused on a defence domain context, with particular focus on the operations and sustainment of fixed-wing defence aircraft. While defence aircraft share similarities with civil aviation platforms, defence aircraft exhibit significant variation in operations and environment and have different performance objectives and constraints. The review utilises a systematic methodology incorporating bibliometric analysis of the considered domain, as well as text processing and clustering of a set of aligned review papers to position the core topics for subsequent discussion. This discussion highlights state-of-the-art applications and associated success factors in predictive maintenance and decision support, followed by an identification of practical and research challenges. The scope is primarily confined to fixed-wing defence aircraft, including legacy and emerging aircraft platforms. It highlights that challenges in predictive maintenance and PHM for researchers and practitioners alike do not necessarily revolve solely on what can be monitored, but also covers how robust decisions can be made with the quality of data available.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Pancreatoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations 2019.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are now implemented worldwide with strong evidence that adhesion to such protocol reduces medical complications, costs and hospital stay. This concept has been applied for pancreatic surgery since the first published guidelines in 2012. This study presents the updated ERAS recommendations for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) based on the best available evidence and on expert consensus. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in three databases (Embase, Medline Ovid and Cochrane Library Wiley) for the 27 developed ERAS items. Quality of randomized trials was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement checklist. The level of evidence for each item was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system. The Delphi method was used to validate the final recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 314 articles were included in the systematic review. Consensus among experts was reached after three rounds. A well-implemented ERAS protocol with good compliance is associated with a reduction in medical complications and length of hospital stay. The highest level of evidence was available for five items: avoiding hypothermia, use of wound catheters as an alternative to epidural analgesia, antimicrobial and thromboprophylaxis protocols and preoperative nutritional interventions for patients with severe weight loss (> 15%). CONCLUSIONS: The current updated ERAS recommendations for PD are based on the best available evidence and processed by the Delphi method. Prospective studies of high quality are encouraged to confirm the benefit of current updated recommendations.

The impact of peri-operative intravenous lidocaine on postoperative outcome after elective colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: There has recently been increasing interest in the use of peri-operative intravenous lidocaine (IVL) due to its analgesic, anti-inflammatory and opioid-sparing effects. However, these potential benefits are not well established in elective colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of peri-operative IVL infusion on postoperative outcome in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. DESIGN: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing peri-operative IVL with placebo infusion in elective colorectal surgery. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain scores up to 48 h. The secondary outcome measures included time to return of gastrointestinal function, postoperative morphine requirement, anastomotic leak, local anaesthetic toxicity and hospital length of stay. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases were searched on 5 November 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were RCTs evaluating the role of peri-operative IVL vs. placebo in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Exclusion criteria were paediatric patients, noncolorectal or emergency procedures, non-RCT methodology or lack of relevant outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies were included (n = 508 patients; 265 who had undergone IVL infusion, 243 who had undergone placebo infusion). IVL infusion was associated with a significant reduction in time to defecation (mean difference -12.06 h, 95% CI -17.83 to -6.29, I = 93%, P = 0.0001), hospital length of stay (mean difference -0.76 days, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.19, I = 45%, P = 0.009) and postoperative pain scores at early time points, although this difference does not meet the threshold for a clinically relevant difference. There was no difference in time to pass flatus (mean difference -5.33 h, 95% CI -11.53 to 0.88, I = 90%, P = 0.09), nor in rates of surgical site infection or anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides some support for the administration of peri-operative IVL infusion in elective colorectal surgery. However, further evidence is necessary to fully elucidate its potential benefits in light of the high levels of study heterogeneity and mixed quality of methodology.

An unmet clinical need: The history of thrombus imaging.

Robust thrombus imaging is an unresolved clinical unmet need dating back to the mid 1970s. While early molecular imaging approaches began with nuclear SPECT imaging, contrast agents for virtually all biomedical imaging modalities have been demonstrated in vivo with unique strengths and common weaknesses. Two primary molecular imaging targets have been pursued for thrombus imaging: platelets and fibrin. Some common issues noted over 40 years ago persist today. Acute thrombus is readily imaged with all probes and modalities, but aged thrombus remains a challenge. Similarly, anti-coagulation continues to interfere with and often negate thrombus imaging efficacy, but heparin is clinically required in patients suspected of pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis or coronary ruptured plaque prior to confirmatory diagnostic studies have been executed and interpreted. These fundamental issues can be overcome, but an innovative departure from the prior approaches will be needed.

The Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research (RECOvER) Checklist: A Joint Statement by the ERAS® and ERAS® USA Societies.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are multimodal care pathways designed to minimize the physiological and psychological impact of surgery for patients. Increased compliance with ERAS guidelines is associated with improved patient outcomes across surgical types. As ERAS programs have proliferated, an unintentional effect has been significant variation in how ERAS-related studies are reported in the literature. METHODS: To improve the quality of ERAS reporting, ERAS® USA and the ERAS® Society launched an effort to create an instrument to assist authors in manuscript preparation. Criteria to include were selected by a combination of literature review and expert opinion. The final checklist was refined by group consensus. RESULTS: The Societies present the Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research (RECOvER) Checklist. The tool contains 20 items including best practices for reporting clinical pathways, compliance auditing, and formatting guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The RECOvER Checklist is intended to provide a standardized framework for the reporting of ERAS-related studies. The checklist can also assist reviewers in evaluating the quality of ERAS-related manuscripts. Authors are encouraged to include the RECOvER Checklist when submitting ERAS-related studies to peer-reviewed journals.

Impact of Preoperative Erythropoietin on Allogeneic Blood Transfusions in Surgical Patients: Results From a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Erythropoietic-stimulating agents such as erythropoietin have been used as part of patient blood management programs to reduce or even avoid the use of allogeneic blood transfusions. We review the literature to evaluate the effect of preoperative erythropoietin use on the risk of exposure to perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions. METHODS: The study involved a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the use of preoperative erythropoietin. The primary outcome was the reported incidence of allogeneic red blood cell transfusions during inpatient hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included phase-specific allogeneic red blood cell transfusions (ie, intraoperative, postoperative), intraoperative estimated blood loss, perioperative hemoglobin levels, length of stay, and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: A total of 32 randomized controlled trials (n = 4750 patients) were included, comparing preoperative erythropoietin (n = 2482 patients) to placebo (n = 2268 patients). Preoperative erythropoietin is associated with a significant decrease in incidence of allogeneic blood transfusions among all patients (n = 28 studies; risk ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.73; P < .001) as well as patients undergoing cardiac (n = 9 studies; risk ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.81; P = .003) and elective orthopedic (n = 5 studies; risk ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.28-0.46; P < .001) surgery compared to placebo, respectively. Preoperative erythropoietin was also associated with fewer phase-specific red blood cell transfusions. There was no difference between groups in incidence of thromboembolic events (n = 28 studies; risk ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78-1.33; P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative erythropoietin is associated with a significant reduction in perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions. This finding is also confirmed among the subset of patients undergoing cardiac and orthopedic surgery. Furthermore, our study demonstrates no significant increase in risk of thromboembolic complications with preoperative erythropoietin administration.

Evidence Review Conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery: Focus on Anesthesiology for Hip Fracture Surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols represent patient-centered, evidence-based, multidisciplinary care of the surgical patient. Although these patterns have been validated in numerous surgical specialities, ERAS has not been widely described for patients undergoing hip fracture (HFx) repair. As part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery, we have conducted a full evidence review of interventions that form the basis of the anesthesia components of the ERAS HFx pathway. A literature search was performed for each protocol component, and the highest levels of evidence available were selected for review. Anesthesiology components of care were identified and evaluated across the perioperative continuum. For the preoperative phase, the use of regional analgesia and nonopioid multimodal analgesic agents is suggested. For the intraoperative phase, a standardized anesthetic with postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis is suggested. For the postoperative phase, a multimodal (primarily nonopioid) analgesic regimen is suggested. A summary of the best available evidence and recommendations for inclusion in ERAS protocols for HFx repair are provided.

Evidence Review Conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery: Focus on Anesthesiology for Bariatric Surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols for bariatric surgery are increasingly being implemented, and reports suggest that they may be associated with superior outcomes, reduced length of hospital stay, and cost savings. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, in partnership with the American College of Surgeons and the Johns Hopkins Medicine Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, has developed the Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery. We have conducted an evidence review to select anesthetic interventions that positively influence outcomes and facilitate recovery after bariatric surgery. A literature search was performed for each intervention, and the highest levels of available evidence were considered. Anesthesiology-related interventions for pre- (carbohydrate loading/fasting, multimodal preanesthetic medications), intra- (standardized intraoperative pathway, regional anesthesia, opioid minimization and multimodal analgesia, protective ventilation strategy, fluid minimization), and postoperative (multimodal analgesia with opioid minimization) phases of care are included. We have summarized the best available evidence to recommend the anesthetic components of care for enhanced recovery after surgery for bariatric surgery. There is evidence in the literature, and from society guidelines, to support the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery goals for bariatric surgery.

Evidence Review Conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery: Focus on Anesthesiology for Colorectal Surgery.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, in partnership with the American College of Surgeons and the Johns Hopkins Medicine Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, has developed the Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery (ISCR), which is a national effort to disseminate best practices in perioperative care to more than 750 hospitals across multiple procedures in the next 5 years. The program will integrate evidence-based processes central to enhanced recovery and prevention of surgical site infection, venous thromboembolic events, catheter-associated urinary tract infections with socioadaptive interventions to improve surgical outcomes, patient experience, and perioperative safety culture. The objectives of this review are to evaluate the evidence supporting anesthesiology components of colorectal (CR) pathways and to develop an evidence-based CR protocol for implementation. Anesthesiology protocol components were identified through review of existing CR enhanced recovery pathways from several professional associations/societies and expert feedback. These guidelines/recommendations were supplemented by evidence made further literature searches. Anesthesiology protocol components were identified spanning the immediate preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care. Components included carbohydrate loading, reduced fasting, multimodal preanesthesia medication, antibiotic prophylaxis, blood transfusion, intraoperative fluid management/goal-directed fluid therapy, normothermia, a standardized intraoperative anesthesia pathway, and standard postoperative multimodal analgesic regimens.

Evidence Review Conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery: Focus on Anesthesiology for Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has rapidly gained popularity in a variety of surgical subspecialities. A large body of literature suggests that ERAS leads to superior outcomes, improved patient satisfaction, reduced length of hospital stay, and cost benefits, without affecting rates of readmission after surgery. These patterns have been described for patients undergoing elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA); however, adoption of ERAS to orthopedic surgery has lagged behind other surgical disciplines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, in partnership with the American College of Surgeons and the Johns Hopkins Medicine Armstrong Institute (AI) for Patient Safety and Quality, has developed the Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery. The program comprises a national effort to incorporate best practice in perioperative care and improve patient safety, for over 750 hospitals and multiple procedures over the next 5 years, including orthopedic surgery. We have conducted a full evidence review of anesthetic interventions to derive anesthesiology-related components of an evidence-based ERAS pathway for TKA. A PubMed search was performed for each protocol component, focusing on the highest levels of evidence in the literature. Search findings are summarized in narrative format. Anesthesiology components of care were identified and evaluated across the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases. A summary of the best available evidence, together with recommendations for inclusion in ERAS protocols for TKA, is provided. There is extensive evidence in the literature, and from society guidelines to support the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery goals for TKA.

Evidence Review Conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery: Focus on Anesthesiology for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Successes using enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for total hip arthroplasty (THA) are increasingly being reported. As in other surgical subspecialties, ERAS for THA has been associated with superior outcomes, improved patient satisfaction, reduced length of hospital stay, and cost savings. Nonetheless, the adoption of ERAS to THA has not been universal. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, in partnership with the American College of Surgeons and the Johns Hopkins Medicine Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, has developed the Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery. We have conducted an evidence review to select anesthetic interventions that positively influence outcomes and facilitate recovery after THA. A literature search was performed for each intervention, and the highest levels of available evidence were considered. Anesthesiology-related interventions for pre- (carbohydrate loading/fasting, multimodal preanesthetic medications), intra- (standardized intraoperative pathway, regional anesthesia, ventilation, tranexamic acid, fluid minimization, glycemic control), and postoperative (multimodal analgesia) phases of care are included. We have summarized the best available evidence to recommend the anesthetic components of care for ERAS for THA. There is evidence in the literature and from society guidelines to support the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery goals for THA.

Embracing change: the era for pediatric ERAS is here.

The concept of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has increasingly been embraced by our adult surgical colleagues, but has been slow to crossover to pediatric surgical subspecialties. ERAS® improves outcomes through multiple, incremental steps that act synergistically throughout the entire surgical journey. In practice, ERAS® is a strategy of perioperative management that is defined by strong implementation and ongoing adherence to a patient-focused, multidisciplinary, and multimodal approach. There are increasing numbers of surgical teams exploring ERAS® in children and there is mounting evidence that this approach may improve surgical care for children across the globe. The first World Congress in Pediatric ERAS® in 2018 has set the stage for a new era in pediatric surgical safety.