Efficacy of opioid spinal analgesia for postoperative pain management after pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of single-shot opioid spinal analgesia after pancreatoduodenectomy remains understudied and lacks comparison to standard continuous thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). METHODS: Pancreatoduodenectomy patients who underwent TEA or opioid spinal for postoperative pain management from 2015 to 2020 were included in this observational cohort study. Primary outcome was patient-reported mean daily pain scores. Secondary outcomes included postoperative morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and length of stay (LOS). Multivariable linear regression models were constructed to compare risk-adjusted outcomes. RESULTS: 180 patients were included: 56 TEA and 124 opioid spinal. Compared to epidural patients, opioid spinal patients were more likely to be older (67.0 vs. 64.6, p=0.045), have greater BMI (26.5 vs. 24.4, p=0.02), and less likely to be smokers (19.4% vs. 41.1%, p=0.002). Opioid spinal, compared to TEA, was associated with lower intraoperative MMEs (0.25 vs. 22.7, p<0.001) and postoperative daily MMEs (7.9 vs. 10.3, p=0.03) on univariate analysis. However, after multivariable adjustment, there was no difference in average pain scores across the postoperative period (spinal vs. epidural: 4.18 vs. 4.14, p=0.93), daily MMEs (p=0.50), or LOS (p=0.23). DISCUSSION: There was no significant difference in postoperative pain scores, opioid use, or LOS between patients managed with TEA or opioid spinal after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications within a colorectal-enhanced recovery protocol.

BACKGROUND: As the opioid epidemic escalates, preoperative opioid use has become increasingly common. Recent studies associated preoperative opioid use with postoperative morbidity. However, limited study of its impact on patients within enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) exists. We assessed the impact of preoperative opioid use on postoperative complications among colorectal surgery patients within an ERP, hypothesizing that opioid-exposed patients would be at increased risk of complications. METHODS: Elective colorectal cases from August 2013 to June 2017 were reviewed in a retrospective cohort study comparing preoperative opioid-exposed patients to opioid-naïve patients. Postoperative complications were defined as a composite of complications captured by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Logistic regression identified risk factors for postoperative complications. RESULTS: 707 patients were identified, including 232 (32.8%) opioid-exposed patients. Opioid-exposed patients were younger (57.9 vs 61.9 years; p < 0.01) and more likely to smoke (27.6 vs 17.1%; p < 0.01). Laparoscopic procedures were less common among opioid-exposed patients (44.8 vs 58.1%; p < 0.01). Median morphine equivalents received were higher in opioid-exposed patients (65.0 vs 20.1 mg; p < 0.01), but compliance to ERP elements was otherwise equivalent. Postoperative complications were higher among opioid-exposed patients (28.5 vs 15.0%; p < 0.01), as was median length of stay (4.0 vs 3.0 days; p < 0.01). Logistic regression identified multiple patient- and procedure-related factors independently associated with postoperative complications, including preoperative opioid use (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications in elective colorectal surgery patients within an ERP. These results highlight the negative impact of opioid use, suggesting an opportunity to further reduce the risk of surgical complications through ERP expansion to include preoperative mitigation strategies for opioid-exposed patients.

Development and Impact of an Institutional Enhanced Recovery Program on Opioid Use, Length of Stay, and Hospital Costs Within an Academic Medical Center: A Cohort Analysis of 7774 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery (ER) is a change management framework in which a multidisciplinary team of stakeholders utilizes evidence-based medicine to protocolize all aspects of a surgical care to allow more rapid return of function. While service-specific reports of ER adoption are common, institutional-wide adoption is complex, and reports of institution-wide ER adoption are lacking in the United States. We hypothesized that ER principles were generalizable across an institution and could be implemented across a multitude of surgical disciplines with improvements in length of stay, opioid consumption, and cost of care. METHODS: Following the establishment of a formal institutional ER program, ER was adopted in 9 distinct surgical subspecialties over 5 years at an academic medical center. We compared length of stay, opioid consumption, and total cost of care in all surgical subspecialties as a function of time using a segmented regression/interrupted time series statistical model. RESULTS: There were 7774 patients among 9 distinct surgical populations including 2155 patients in the pre-ER cohort and 5619 patients in the post-ER cohort. The introduction of an ER protocol was associated with several significant changes: a reduction in length of stay in 5 of 9 specialties; reduction in opioid consumption in 8 specialties; no change or reduction in maximum patient-reported pain scores; and reduction or no change in hospital costs in all specialties. The ER program was associated with an aggregate increase in profit over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Institution-wide efforts to adopt ER can generate significant improvements in patient care, opioid consumption, hospital capacity, and profitability within a large academic medical center.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol Is Associated With On-Time Initiation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Delayed initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy negatively impacts long-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Colorectal enhanced recovery protocols result in decreased complications and length of stay; however, the impact of enhanced recovery on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify factors associated with on-time delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal cancer surgery, hypothesizing that implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol would result in more patients receiving on-time chemotherapy. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery after colorectal cancer resection before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: All of the patients who underwent nonemergent colorectal cancer resections for curative intent from January 2010 to June 2017, excluding patients who had no indication for adjuvant chemotherapy, had received preoperative systemic chemotherapy, or did not have medical oncology records available were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients before and enhanced recovery were compared, with the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery as the primary outcome. Adjuvant chemotherapy delivery was considered on time if initiated ≤8 weeks postoperatively, and treatment was considered delayed or omitted if initiated >8 weeks postoperatively (delayed) or never received (omitted). Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of on-time chemotherapy delivery. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients met inclusion criteria, with 189 patients (52.1%) undergoing surgery after enhanced recovery implementation. Groups differed in laparoscopic approach and median procedure duration, both of which were higher after enhanced recovery. Significantly more patients received on-time chemotherapy after enhanced recovery implementation (p = 0.007). Enhanced recovery was an independent predictor of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.014). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced recovery was associated with receiving on-time adjuvant chemotherapy. As prompt initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in colorectal cancer, future investigation of long-term oncologic outcomes is necessary to evaluate the potential impact of enhanced recovery on survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21. LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN PROTOCOLO DE RECUPERACIÓN ACELERADA SE ASOCIA CON EL INICIO A TIEMPO DE QUIMIOTERAPIA ADYUVANTE EN CÁNCER COLORRECTAL:: El inicio tardío de la quimioterapia adyuvante afecta negativamente la supervivencia a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal. Los protocolos de recuperación acelerada colorrectales dan lugar a una disminución de las complicaciones y la duración de estancia hospitalaria; sin embargo, el impacto de la recuperación acelerada en el momento de inicio de quimioterapia adyuvante sigue siendo desconocido.Este estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar los factores asociados con la administración a tiempo de la quimioterapia adyuvante después de la cirugía de cáncer colorrectal, con la hipótesis de que la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada daría lugar a que más pacientes reciban quimioterapia a tiempo.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo que compara la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo después de la resección del cáncer colorrectal antes y después de la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada.Centro médico académico grande.Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resecciones de cáncer colorrectal no emergentes con intención curativa desde enero de 2010 hasta junio de 2017, excluyendo a los pacientes que no tenían indicación de quimioterapia adyuvante, que recibieron quimioterapia sistémica preoperatoria o no tenían registros médicos de oncología disponibles.Los pacientes se compararon antes y después de la implementación de la recuperación acelerada, con la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo como el resultado primario. La administración de quimioterapia adyuvante se consideró a tiempo si se inició ≤8 semanas después de la operación, y el tratamiento se consideró retrasado / omitido si se inició> 8 semanas después de la operación (retrasado) o nunca fue recibido (omitido). La regresión logística multivariable identificó predictores de administración de quimioterapia a tiempo.363 pacientes cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión, con 189 (52.1%) pacientes sometidos a cirugía después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada. Los grupos difirieron en el abordaje laparoscópico y la duración media del procedimiento; ambos factores fueron mayores después de la recuperación acelerada. Significativamente más pacientes recibieron quimioterapia a tiempo después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada (p = 0.007). La recuperación acelerada fue un factor predictivo independiente de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo (p = 0.014).Diseño retrospectivo, tipo ¨antes y después¨ no aleatorizado.La recuperación acelerada se asoció con la recepción de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo. Debido a que el inicio rápido de la quimioterapia adyuvante mejora la supervivencia en el cáncer colorrectal, en el futuro será necesario investigar los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo para evaluar el impacto potencial de la recuperación acelerada en la supervivencia. Vea el Resumen en Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21.

Enhanced recovery program for minimally invasive and vaginal urogynecologic surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) are evidenced-based interventions designed to standardize perioperative care and expedite recovery to baseline functional status after surgery. There remains a paucity of data addressing the effect of ERPs on pelvic reconstructive surgery patients. METHODS: An ERP was implemented at our institution including: patient counseling, carbohydrate loading, avoidance of opioids, goal-directed fluid resuscitation, immediate postoperative feeding and early ambulation. Patients undergoing elective pelvic reconstructive surgery before and after implementation of the ERP were identified in this cohort study. RESULTS: One hundred eighteen patients underwent pelvic reconstructive surgery within the ERP compared with 76 historic controls. Reductions were seen in length of hospital stay (29.9 vs. 27.9 h, p = 0.04), total morphine equivalents (37.4 vs. 19.4 mg, p < 0.01) and total intravenous fluids administered (2.7 l vs. 1.5 l, p < 0.0001). Hospital discharges before noon doubled (32.9 vs. 60.2%, p < 0.01). More patients in the ERP group ambulated on the day of surgery (17.1 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.01) and ambulated at least two times the day following surgery (34.2 vs. 72.9%, p < 0.01). No differences were seen in average pain scores (highest pain score 7.39 vs. 7.37, p = 0.95), hospital readmissions (3.9 vs. 3.4%, p = 0.84), or postoperative complications (6.58 vs. 8.47%, p = 0.79). Patient satisfaction significantly improved. ERP was not associated with an increase in 30-day total hospital costs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ERP for pelvic reconstructive surgery patients was associated with a reduced length of hospital stay, improved patient satisfaction, and decreased administration of intravenous fluids and opioids without an increase in complications, readmissions, or hospital costs.

Acute Kidney Injury in the Age of Enhanced Recovery Protocols.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury is a prevalent complication after abdominal surgery. With increasing adoption of enhanced recovery protocols, concern exists for concomitant increase in acute kidney injury. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated effects of enhanced recovery on acute kidney injury through identification of risk factors. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing acute kidney injury rates before and after implementation of enhanced recovery protocol. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: All of the patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2016, excluding patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients before and after enhanced recovery implementation were compared, with rate of acute kidney injury as the primary outcome. Acute kidney injury was defined as a rise in serum creatinine ≥1.5 times baseline within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors for acute kidney injury. RESULTS: A total of 900 cases were identified, including 461 before and 439 after enhanced recovery; 114 cases were complicated by acute kidney injury, including 11.93% of patients before and 13.44% after implementation of enhanced recovery (p = 0.50). Five patients required hemodialysis, with 2 cases after protocol implementation. Multivariable logistic regression identified hypertension, functional status, ureteral stents, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, operative time >200 minutes, and increased intravenous fluid administration on postoperative day 1 as predictors of acute kidney injury. Laparoscopic surgery decreased the risk of acute kidney injury. The enhanced recovery protocol was not independently associated with acute kidney injury. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in rates of acute kidney injury was detected before and after implementation of a colorectal enhanced recovery protocol. Independent predictors of acute kidney injury were identified and could be used to alter the protocol in high-risk patients. Future study is needed to determine whether protocol modifications will further decrease rates of acute kidney injury in this population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A568.

Review of enhanced recovery programs in benign gynecologic surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) are evidence-based protocols designed to improve functional rehabilitation after surgery. ERPs have gained widespread acceptance in many surgical disciplines, and their use leads to significant improvements in patient outcomes while reducing hospital length of stay (LOS). There remains a paucity of data on the use of ERPs in benign gynecologic surgery. The purpose of this review was to evaluate current literature on the use of ERP concepts in benign gynecologic surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane databases was conducted, cross-referencing search terms related to gynecologic surgery and ERP concepts. The search was limited to publications available in English. Studies published prior to 2000, and those involving gynecologic oncology, nonadult patients, and outpatient surgery were excluded. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the analysis. Due to heterogeneity of the included studies, no statistical pooling was possible and comparison between studies was limited to their respective themes. Primary study outcomes included LOS, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), pain management, patient satisfaction, and hospital costs. Five studies investigated ERPs, two evaluated measures to improve PONV, and four focused on unique aspects of pain management. Across the studies, ERPs that focused on the patients' basic symptoms and recovery were found to have equal, if not better, outcomes than standard practice. CONCLUSIONS: This integrative review supports the implementation of ERPs in benign gynecologic surgery. The results showed that the use of ERPs decreased LOS, improved pain scores, and reduced hospital costs, without increasing perioperative complications. We suggest additional randomized controlled trials of ERP concepts in benign gynecologic surgery to support their more widespread use and application.

Enhanced Recovery After Urogynecologic Surgery: A Survey of Patient Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify which aspects/components of the enhanced recovery program (ERP) were associated with a positive patient surgical experience for patients undergoing urogynecologic surgery. METHODS: A total of 198 patients who underwent pelvic reconstructive surgery requiring hospital admission were invited to complete questionnaires modeled after the validated Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surgical Care Survey patient experience survey. Patients were asked about 3 phases of ERP interventions: (1) before surgery (patient education, carbohydrate loading), (2) during the hospital stay (pain control, nausea, early ambulation), and (3) after discharge (return of bladder and bowel function). RESULTS: One hundred patients completed the survey (51% response rate). Greater than 90% of patients rated their overall surgical experience favorably (≥8 on 1-10 scale) regardless of age (P = 0.98), race (P = 0.26), education level (P = 0.12), perception of overall health (P = 0.17), or number of prior surgical procedures (P = 0.86). Ninety-two percent of patients reported that preoperative teaching about surgery was "very helpful," and specifically 90% reported that the ERP educational handbook was useful. Patients who reported a poor perception of their overall mental health were more likely to rate their surgical experience less favorably (<8 on 1-10 scale; P = 0.01), as were patients who left the hospital with a Foley catheter (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Greater than 90% of women surveyed who rated undergoing inpatient pelvic reconstructive surgery positively perceived their surgical experience within the ERP. The majority of patients who had a positive perception of the perioperative experience found the preoperative patient education useful.

Optimizing post-operative opiate prescribing following gynecologic surgery.

Background: Post-operative opiate prescribing has traditionally been stratified by procedure type with little regard for patient opiate utilization. We sought to evaluate peri-operative factors associated with patient opiate utilization post-operatively to develop, implement, and assess a discharge prescribing intervention. Study design: This was a quality improvement study of opiate prescribing practices for patients undergoing gynecologic surgery on an enhanced recovery pathway (ERAS) pre- and post-discharge prescription intervention. In the pre-intervention cohort (12/2018 to 05/2019), peri-operative factors (demographic, procedure, and pain scores) associated with post-operative patient opiate usage and quantity of opiate prescribed were identified. A discharge planning intervention based solely on opiate usage was implemented. The pre- and post-intervention cohort (07/2020 to 09/2020) were compared to assess changes in post-operative opiate prescribing and refill requests. Results: There were 220 patients in the pre-intervention cohort and 120 patients post-intervention. Post-operative opiate usage in the pre-intervention cohort was correlated only with pain score and age (p < 0.001, p = 0.04). Quantity of opiate prescribed was correlated only with procedure type and not reflective of patient opiate usage. Using this information, a discharge planning intervention for opiate prescription informed by opiate usage in the twenty-four hours prior to discharge was added to the discharge order set. Post-intervention, adherence to recommended prescription was 40.8%. Opiate prescriptions decreased from a mean 27.3 tablets to 14.8 tablets (p < 0.001). Conclusions: A tailored, patient specific approach to post-operative opiate prescribing can significantly decrease the quantity of opiates prescribed.

Enhanced Recovery Program for Outpatient Female Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) are evidence-based perioperative interventions designed to reduce narcotic use, decrease hospital length of stay, decrease medical costs, and improve patient satisfaction. Given the increase in outpatient procedures in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery, we sought to compare patient outcomes before and after implementation of an ERP for women undergoing outpatient pelvic reconstructive surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective nonrandomized cohort quality improvement practice initiative. The ERP intervention group included consecutive patients (n = 66) undergoing elective outpatient pelvic reconstructive surgery from March 2016 to October 2016. Historical controls were consecutive patients (n = 124) who had undergone outpatient pelvic reconstructive surgery in the same period a year before ERP implementation. Our primary outcome was opioid use and postoperative pain scores. Secondary outcomes included procedure time, use of intravenous fluids, time to discharge, and total hospital cost. RESULTS: There was an observed reduction in opioid use between the ERP patients and historic controls as measured by intraoperative morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and total MMEs, with no difference in postoperative pain scores or postoperative MME. In addition, reduction in length of procedure (P = 0.03), intraoperative intravenous fluids (P < 0.0001), and total hospital cost (P ≤ 0.01) was noted between the ERP patients and historic controls. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an outpatient ERP for female pelvic reconstructive surgery was associated with decreased intraoperative and total MMEs, decreased length of procedure, decreased administration of intravenous fluids, and decreased total hospital cost without changing postoperative pain scores.

Is less really more? Reexamining video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy in the setting of an enhanced recovery protocol.

OBJECTIVES: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy has been associated with improved pain, length of stay, and outcomes compared with open lobectomy. However, enhanced recovery protocols improve outcomes after both procedures. We aimed to compare video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and open lobectomy in the setting of a comprehensive enhanced recovery protocol. METHODS: All patients undergoing lobectomy for lung cancer at a single institution since the adoption of an enhanced recovery protocol (May 2016 to December 2018) were stratified by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open status and compared. Demographics and outcomes, including length of stay, daily pain scores, and short-term operative complications, were compared using standard univariate statistics and multivariable models. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients underwent lobectomy, including 71 (54.6%) undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and 59 (45.4%) undergoing open surgery. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open cases exhibited similar length of stay (median 4 days for both, P = .07), opioid requirement (33.2 vs 30.8 mg morphine equivalents, P = .86), and pain scores at 0, 1, 2, and 3 days after surgery (4.3 vs 2.8, P = .12; 4.4 vs 3.7, P = .27; 3.9 vs 3.5, P = .83; and 3.4 vs 3.5, P = .98, respectively). Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy exhibited lower rates of readmission (1.4% vs 17.0%, P < .01), postoperative transfusion requirement (0% vs 10.2%, P < .01), and pneumonia (1.4% vs 10.2%, P = .05). After risk adjustment, an open procedure (vs video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery status) did not significantly affect the length of stay (effect 0.18; P = .10) or overall complication rate (odds ratio, 1.9; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a comprehensive enhanced recovery protocol, patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open lobectomy exhibited similar short-term outcomes. Surgical incision may have less impact on outcomes in the setting of a comprehensive thoracic enhanced recovery protocol.

Impact of a perioperative oral opioid substitution protocol during the nationwide intravenous opioid shortage: A single center, interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To mitigate the recent nationwide shortage of intravenous opioids, we developed a standardized perioperative oral opioid guideline anchored with appropriate use of nonopioid analgesia, neuraxial and loco-regional techniques. We hypothesize that adoption of this new guideline was associated with: 1) equivalent patient reported pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU); and 2) equivalent total opioid use (oral and parenteral) during the perioperative period. METHODS: Cases performed from July 1, 2017 to May 31, 2019 were screened. All opioids administered were converted to intravenous morphine milligram equivalents. Segmented regression analyses of interrupted time series were performed examining the change in opioid use, PACU pain scores and number of non-opioid analgesic medications used before and after the protocol implementation in April 2018. RESULTS: After exclusions, 29, 621 cases were included in the analysis. No significant differences in demographic, ASA status, case length and surgical procedure type were present in the pre and post-intervention period. A significant decrease in total (Estimate: -39.9 mg, SE: 6.9 mg, p < 0.001) and parenteral (Estimate: -51.6 mg, SE: 7.1 mg, p < 0.001) opioid use with a significant increase in oral opioid use (Estimate: 9.4 mg, SE: 1.1 mg, p < 0.001) was noted after the intervention. Pain scores were not significantly different between the pre- and post-intervention period (Estimate: 0.05, SE: 0.13, p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: We report our experience with a primary perioperative oral based opioid regimen that is associated with decreased total opioid consumption and equivalent patient reported pain scores.

Implementing a Thoracic Enhanced Recovery Program: Lessons Learned in the First Year.

BACKGROUND: To minimize the stress of operations, improve the patient experience, reduce variability, and optimize resource utilization, we implemented a thoracic enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol and evaluated progress after 1 year. METHODS: Two protocols were developed: video-assisted thoracic surgery (ERAS-VATS) and thoracotomy (ERAS-T). Each incorporated preoperative patient education, carbohydrate loading, opioid-sparing analgesia, conservative fluid management, and early ambulation. Patient outcomes, length of stay, pain scores, opioid use, fluid administration, and cost for ERAS patients were compared with historic controls from the year before program initiation. RESULTS: Historic VATS (n = 162) were compared with 81 ERAS-VATS patients. Median postoperative morphine equivalents (86 versus 22 mg, p < 0.0001), total fluid balance (1279 versus 227 mL, p < 0.0001), and mean inflation adjusted hospital costs ($20,169 versus $14,870, p = 0.0003) all decreased significantly. Historic thoracotomy patients (n = 62) were compared with 58 ERAS-T patients. Median postoperative morphine equivalents (130 versus 54 mg, p < 0.0001), total fluid balance (788 versus -489 mL, p = 0.012), length of stay (6.0 versus 4.0 days, p = 0.009), and mean inflation adjusted hospital costs ($41,950 versus $26,089, p < 0.00001) all decreased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of thoracic ERAS is a dynamic process with potential to improve outcomes in thoracic surgical procedures. In the first year we shortened length of stay, decreased opioid usage, minimized fluid overload, and decreased hospital costs.

Enhanced Recovery Implementation in Major Gynecologic Surgeries: Effect of Care Standardization.

OBJECTIVE: To examine implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for women undergoing major gynecologic surgery at an academic institution and compare surgical outcomes before and after implementation. METHODS: Two ERAS protocols were developed: a full pathway using regional anesthesia for open procedures and a light pathway without regional anesthesia for vaginal and minimally invasive procedures. Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways included extensive preoperative counseling, carbohydrate loading and oral fluids before surgery, multimodal analgesia with avoidance of intravenous opioids, intraoperative goal-directed fluid resuscitation, and immediate postoperative feeding and ambulation. A before-and-after study design was used to compare clinical outcomes, costs, and patient satisfaction. Complications and risk-adjusted length of stay were drawn from the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. RESULTS: On the ERAS full protocol, 136 patients were compared with 211 historical controls and the median length of stay was reduced (2.0 compared with 3.0 days; P=.007) despite an increase in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-predicted length of stay (2.5 compared with 2.0 days; P=.009). Reductions were seen in median intraoperative morphine equivalents (0.3 compared with 12.7 mg; P<.001), intraoperative (285 compared with 1,250 mL; P<.001) and total intravenous fluids (-917.5 compared with 1,410 mL; P<.001), immediate postoperative pain scores (3.7 compared with 5.0; P<.001), and total complications (21.3% compared with 40.2%; P=.004). On the ERAS light protocol, 249 patients were compared with 324 historical controls and demonstrated decreased intraoperative and postoperative morphine equivalents (0.0 compared with 13.0 mg; P<.001 and 15.0 compared with 23.6 mg; P<.001) and decreased intraoperative and overall net intravenous fluids (P<.001). Patient satisfaction scores showed a marked and significant improvement on focus questions regarding pain control, nurses keeping patients informed, and staff teamwork; 30-day total hospital costs were significantly decreased in both ERAS groups. CONCLUSION: Implementation of ERAS protocols in gynecologic surgery was associated with a substantial decrease in intravenous fluids and morphine administration coupled with reduction in length of stay for open procedures combined with improved patient satisfaction and decreased hospital costs.