Contemporary Perioperative Nutritional Care.

Over the last decades, surgical complication rates have fallen drastically. With the introduction of new surgical techniques coupled with specific evidence-based perioperative care protocols, patients today run half the risk of complications compared with traditional care. Many patients who in previous years needed weeks of hospital care now recover and can leave in days. These remarkable improvements are achieved by using nutritional stress-reducing care elements for the surgical patient that reduce metabolic stress and allow for the return of gut function. This new approach to nutritional care and how it is delivered as an integral part of enhancing recovery after surgery are outlined in this review. We also summarize the new and increased understanding of the effects of the routes of delivering nutrition and the role of the gut, as well as the current recommendations for artificial nutritional support.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage in colonic procedures within an ERAS-protocol. A retrospective cohort study from the Swedish part of the international ERAS-database.

BACKGROUND: Research on anastomotic leakage (AL) in colonic procedures within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has not yet been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for AL after colonic surgery. METHODS: The study included all consecutively recorded patients operated with colonic resection surgery in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS) between September 2009 and June 2022. The cohort was analyzed and evaluated regarding risk factors for AL. RESULTS: Altogether 10,632 patients were included, 10,219 were without AL and 413 (3.9%) were with AL. After adjusted analysis, male sex (4.6% AL), OR: 1.49; 95% CI (1.16-1.90), obesity (4.8% AL), OR: 1.62; 95% CI (1.18-2.24), previous surgery (4.4% AL), OR: 1.45; 95% CI (1.14-1.86), open surgery (4.4% AL), OR: 1.36; 95% CI (1.02-1.83), anastomosis between small bowel and rectum (13.1% AL), OR: 3.97; 95% CI (2.23-7.10), stapled anastomosis (5.3% AL), OR: 2.46; 95% CI (1.79-3.38), inhalation anesthesia (4.2% AL), OR: 1.80; 95% CI (1.26-2.57), and conversion to open surgery (5.5% AL), OR 1.49; 95% CI (1.02-2.19) were significant risk factors for AL. Although pre and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS-protocol was similar, excess of fluids day 0 was an independent predictor for AL. CONCLUSION: Male sex, obesity, previous surgery, open surgery, stapled anastomotic technique, anastomosis between small bowel and rectum, inhalation anesthesia, conversion to open surgery, and among ERAS interventions, excess of fluids day 0, were significant risk factors for AL.

Immediate mobilization in post-anesthesia care unit does not increase overall postoperative physical activity after elective colorectal surgery: A randomized, double-blinded controlled trial within an enhanced recovery protocol.

BACKGROUND: The level of post-operative mobilization according to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines is not always achieved. We investigated whether immediate mobilization increases postoperative physical activity. The objective was to evaluate the effects of immediate postoperative mobilization in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) compared to standard care. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial, involved 144 patients, age ≥18 years, undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Patients were randomized to mobilization starting 30 min after arrival in the PACU, or to standard care. Standard care consisted of mobilization a few hours later at the ward according to ERAS guidelines. The primary outcome was physical activity, in terms of number of steps, measured with an accelerometer during postoperative days (PODs) 1-3. Secondary outcomes were physical capacity, functional mobility, time to readiness for discharge, complications, compliance with the ERAS protocol, and physical activity 1 month after surgery. RESULTS: With the intention-to-treat analysis of 144 participants (median age 71, 58% female) 47% underwent laparoscopic-or robotic-assisted surgery. No differences in physical activity during hospital stay were found between the participants in the intervention group compared to the standard care group (adjusted mean ratio 0.97 on POD 1 [95% CI, 0.75-1.27], p = 0.84; 0.89 on POD 2 [95% CI, 0.68-1.16], p = 0.39, and 0.90 on POD 3 [95% CI, 0.69-1.17], p = 0.44); no differences were found in any of the other outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of the intervention of immediate mobilization to standard care did not make the patients more physically active during their hospital stay. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NTC 03357497.

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.

Perioperative care in open aortic vascular surgery: A consensus statement by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society and Society for Vascular Surgery.

The Society for Vascular Surgery and the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society formally collaborated and elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of experts to review the literature and provide evidence-based recommendations related to all the health care received in the perioperative period for patients undergoing open abdominal aortic operations (both transabdominal and retroperitoneal approaches, including supraceliac, suprarenal, and infrarenal clamp sites) for aortic aneurysm and aortoiliac occlusive disease. Structured around the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery core elements, 36 recommendations were made and organized into preadmission, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative recommendations.

Prehabilitation, enhanced recovery after surgery, or both? A narrative review.

This narrative review presents a biological rationale and evidence to describe how the preoperative condition of the patient contributes to postoperative morbidity. Any preoperative condition that prevents a patient from tolerating the physiological stress of surgery (e.g. poor cardiopulmonary reserve, sarcopaenia), impairs the stress response (e.g. malnutrition, frailty), and/or augments the catabolic response to stress (e.g. insulin resistance) is a risk factor for poor surgical outcomes. Prehabilitation interventions that include exercise, nutrition, and psychosocial components can be applied before surgery to strengthen physiological reserve and enhance functional capacity, which, in turn, supports recovery through attaining surgical resilience. Prehabilitation complements Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care to achieve optimal patient outcomes because recovery is not a passive process and it begins preoperatively.

Short-term outcome in robotic vs laparoscopic and open rectal tumor surgery within an ERAS protocol: a retrospective cohort study from the Swedish ERAS database.

BACKGROUND: Advantages of robotic technique over laparoscopic technique in rectal tumor surgery have yet to be proven. Large multicenter, register-based cohort studies within an optimized perioperative care protocol are lacking. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare short-term outcomes in robotic, laparoscopic and open rectal tumor resections, while also determining compliance to the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)®Society Guidelines. METHODS: All patients scheduled for rectal tumor resection and consecutively recorded in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System between January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020, were included (N = 3125). Primary outcomes were postoperative complications and length of stay (LOS) and secondary outcomes compliance to the ERAS protocol, conversion to open surgery, symptoms delaying discharge and reoperations. Uni- and multivariate comparisons were used. RESULTS: Robotic surgery (N = 827) had a similar rate of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1-5), 35.9% compared to open surgery (N = 1429) 40.9% (OR 1.15, 95% CI (0.93, 1.41)) and laparoscopic surgery (N = 869) 31.2% (OR 0.88, 95% CI (0.71, 1.08)). LOS was longer in the open group, median 9 days (IRR 1.35, 95% CI (1.27, 1.44)) and laparoscopic group, 7 days (IRR 1.14, 95% CI (1.07, 1.21)) compared to the robotic group, 6 days. Pre- and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter cohort study, robotic surgery was associated with shorter LOS compared to both laparoscopic and open surgery and had lower conversion rates vs laparoscopic surgery. The rate of complications was similar between groups.

Supervised Immediate Postoperative Mobilization After Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization is a significant part of the ERAS® Society guidelines, in which patients are recommended to spend 2 h out of bed on the day of surgery. However, it is not yet known how early patients can safely be mobilized after completion of colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, and safety of providing almost immediate structured supervised mobilization starting 30 min post-surgery at the postoperative anesthesia care unit (PACU), and to describe reactions to this approach. METHODS: This feasibility study includes 42 patients aged ≥18 years who received elective colorectal surgery at Örebro University Hospital. They underwent a structured mobilization performed by a specialized physiotherapist using a modified Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS). SOMS determines the level of mobilization at four levels from no activity to ambulating. Mobilization was considered successful at SOMS ≥ 2, corresponding to sitting on the edge of the bed as a proxy of sitting in a chair due to lack of space. RESULTS: In all, 71% (n = 30) of the patients reached their highest level of mobilization between the second and third hour of arrival in the PACU. Before discharge to the ward, 43% (n = 18) could stand at the edge of the bed and 38% (n = 16) could ambulate. Symptoms that delayed advancement of mobilization were pain, somnolence, hypotension, nausea, and patient refusal. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised mobilization is feasible and can safely be initiated in the immediate postoperative care after colorectal surgery. Trial registration Clinical trials.gov identifier: NTC03357497.

Acute Kidney Injury within an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Program for Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury (AKI) within an ERAS program for colorectal surgery (CRS). METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study conducted from March 2016 to September 2018 at a single tertiary hospital in Singapore. All adult patients requiring CRS within our ERAS program were considered eligible. Exclusions were stage 5 chronic kidney disease or patients requiring a synchronous liver resection. The primary outcome was AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Acute Kidney Injury Work Group. Secondary outcomes included mortality, major complications, and hospital length of stay. Patient, surgical, and anaesthesia-related data were analysed to determine factors associated with AKI. RESULTS: A total of 575 patients were eligible for the study. Twenty patients were excluded from the study leaving 555 patients for analysis. Mean age was 67.8 (SD 11.4) years. Seventy-four patients met the criteria for AKI (13.4%: stage 1-11.2%, stage 2-2.0%, stage 3-0.2%). One patient required renal replacement therapy (RRT). Patients with AKI had a longer length of stay (median [IQR], 11.0 [5.0-17.0] days vs 6.0 [4.0-8.0] days; P < .001), more major complications (OR, 6.55; 95% CI, 3.00-14.35, P < .001), and a trend towards higher mortality at one year (OR, 1.44; 95% CI 0.48-4.30; p = 0.511. After multivariable regression analysis, factors associated with AKI were preoperative creatinine (OR, 1.01 per 10 µmol/l; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22; P = 0.01), robotic surgery vs open surgery (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.39; P < 0.001), anaesthesia duration (OR, 1.38 per hour; 95% CI, 1.22-1.55; P < 0.001), and major complications (OR, 5.55; 95% CI, 2.63-11.70; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the present cohort, the implementation of an ERAS program for CRS was associated with a low prevalence of moderate to severe AKI despite a balanced intravenous fluid regimen. Patients having open surgery, longer procedures, and major complications are at increased risk of AKI.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Abdominal and Pelvic Surgery at Primary and Secondary Hospitals in Low-Middle-Income Countries (LMIC's): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendation.

BACKGROUND: This is the first Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline for primary and secondary hospitals in low-middle-income countries (LMIC's) for elective abdominal and gynecologic care. METHODS: The ERAS LMIC Guidelines group was established by the ERAS® Society in collaboration with different representatives of perioperative care from LMIC's. The group consisted of seven members from the ERAS® Society and eight members from LMIC's. An updated systematic literature search and evaluation of evidence from previous ERAS® guidelines was performed by the leading authors of the Colorectal (2018) and Gynecologic (2019) surgery guidelines (Gustafsson et al in World J Surg 43:6592-695, Nelson et al in Int J Gynecol Cancer 29(4):651-668). Meta-analyses randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies from both HIC's and LMIC's were considered for each perioperative item. The members in the LMIC group then applied the current evidence and adapted the recommendations for each intervention as well as identifying possible new items relevant to LMIC's. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE) methodology was used to determine the quality of the published evidence. The strength of the recommendations was based on importance of the problem, quality of evidence, balance between desirable and undesirable effects, acceptability to key stakeholders, cost of implementation and specifically the feasibility of implementing in LMIC's and determined through discussions and consensus. RESULTS: In addition to previously described ERAS® Society interventions, the following items were included, revised or discussed: the Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC), preoperative routine human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing in countries with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS (CD4 and viral load for those patients that are HIV positive), delirium screening and prevention, COVID 19 screening, VTE prophylaxis, immuno-nutrition, prehabilitation, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and a standardized postoperative monitoring guideline. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are seen as a starting point to address the urgent need to improve perioperative care and to effect data-driven, evidence-based care in LMIC's.

Preoperative nutrition care in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programs: are we missing an opportunity?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A key component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is the integration of nutrition care elements into the surgical pathway, recognizing that preoperative nutrition status affects outcomes of surgery and must be optimized for recovery. We reviewed the preoperative nutrition care recommendations included in ERAS Society guidelines for adults undergoing major surgery and their implementation. RECENT FINDINGS: All ERAS Society guidelines reviewed recommend preoperative patient education to describe the procedures and expectations of surgery; however, only one guideline specifies inclusion of routine nutrition education before surgery. All guidelines included a recommendation for at least one of the following nutrition care elements: nutrition risk screening, nutrition assessment, and nutrition intervention. However, the impact of preoperative nutrition care could not be evaluated because it was rarely reported in recent literature for most surgical disciplines. A small number of studies reported on the preoperative nutrition care elements within their ERAS programs and found a positive impact of ERAS implementation on nutrition care practices, including increased rates of nutrition risk screening. SUMMARY: There is an opportunity to improve the reporting of preoperative nutrition care elements within ERAS programs, which will enhance our understanding of how nutrition care elements influence patient outcomes and experiences.

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage in Patients with Rectal Tumors Undergoing Anterior Resection within an ERAS Protocol: Results from the Swedish ERAS Database.

BACKGROUND: Research on risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) alone within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has not yet been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for AL and study short-term outcome after AL in patients operated with anterior resection (AR). METHODS: All prospectively and consecutively recorded patients operated with AR in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS) between January 2010 and February 2020 were included. The cohort was evaluated regarding risk factors for AL and short-term outcomes, including uni- and multivariate analysis. Pre-, intra- and postoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines was calculated and evaluated. RESULTS: Altogether 1900 patients were included, 155 (8.2%) with AL and 1745 without AL. Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, year of surgery 2016-2020, duration of primary surgery and age remained significant predictors for AL in multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference in overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines between groups. Only preadmission patient education remained as a significant ERAS variable associated with less AL. AL was associated with longer length of stay (LOS), higher morbidity rate and higher rate of reoperations. CONCLUSION: Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, duration of surgery, surgery later in study period, age and preadmission patient education were associated with AL in patients operated on with AR. Overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol was high in both groups and not associated with AL.

Validity of Routinely Collected Swedish Data in the International Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Database.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess patient coverage, validity and data quality in the Swedish part of the International Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Interactive Audit System (EIAS). METHOD: All Swedish ERAS centers that recorded colorectal surgery data in EIAS between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2017, were included (N = 12). Information registered in EIAS was compared with data from electronic medical records at each hospital to assess the overall coverage of EIAS. Twenty random-selected patients from each of the contributing centers were assessed for accuracy for a set of clinically relevant variables. All patients admitted to the contributing centers were included for the assessment of rate of missing on a selection of key clinical variables. RESULTS: Eight hospitals provided complete information for the evaluation, while four hospitals only allowed assessment of coverage and missing data. The eight hospitals had an overall coverage of 98.8% in EIAS (n = 1301) and the four 86.7% (n = 811). The average agreement for the assessed postoperative outcome variables was 96.5%. The accuracy was excellent for 'length of hospital stay,' 'reoperation,' and 'any complications,' but lower for other types of complications. Only a few variables had more than 5% missing data, and missingness was associated with hospital type and size. CONCLUSION: This validation of the Swedish part of the international ERAS database suggests high patient coverage in EIAS and high agreement and limited missingness in clinically relevant variables. This validation approach or a modified version can be used for continued validation of the International ERAS database.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: Part 1-Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. METHODS: Experts in aspects of 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 on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled 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 non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1-Preoperative Care and Part 2-Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. RESULTS: Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Patients' perspectives of prehabilitation as an extension of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and prehabilitation programs are evidence-based and patient-focused, yet meaningful patient input could further enhance these interventions to produce superior patient outcomes and patient experiences. We conducted a qualitative study with patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care to determine how they prepared for surgery, their views on prehabilitation and how prehabilitation could be delivered to best meet patient needs. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with adult patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care within 3 months after surgery. Patients were enrolled between April 2018 and June 2019 through purposive sampling from 1 hospital in Alberta. The interview transcripts were analyzed independently by a researcher and a trained patient-researcher using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty patients were interviewed. Three main themes were identified. First, waiting for surgery: patients described fear, anxiety, isolation and deterioration of their mental and physical states as they waited passively for surgery. Second, preparing would have been better than just waiting: patients perceived that a prehabilitation program could prepare them for their operation if it addressed their emotional and physical needs, provided personalized support, offered home strategies, involved family and included surgical expectations (both what to expect and what is expected of them). Third, partnering with patients: preoperative preparation should occur on a continuum that meets patients where they are at and in a partnership that respects patients' expertise and desired level of engagement. CONCLUSION: We identified several patient priorities for the preoperative period. Integrating these priorities within ERAS and prehabilitative programs could improve patient satisfaction, experiences and outcomes. Actively engaging patients in their care might alleviate some of the anxiety and fear associated with waiting passively for surgery.

ß-Blockade in Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Simple Measure of Improving Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain whether regular ß-blocker exposure can improve short- and long-term outcomes after rectal cancer surgery. BACKGROUND: Surgery for rectal cancer is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. There is increasing evidence to suggest that there is a survival benefit in patients exposed to ß-blockers undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Studies investigating the effects on outcomes in patients subjected to surgery for rectal cancer are lacking. METHODS: All adult patients undergoing elective abdominal resection for rectal cancer over a 10-year period were recruited from the prospectively collected Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Patients were subdivided according to preoperative ß-blocker exposure status. Outcomes of interest were 30-day complications, 30-day cause-specific mortality, and 1-year all-cause mortality. The association between ß-blocker use and outcomes were analyzed using Poisson regression model with robust standard errors for 30-day complications and cause-specific mortality. One-year survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: A total of 11,966 patients were included in the current study, of whom 3513 (29.36%) were exposed to regular preoperative ß-blockers. A significant decrease in 30-day mortality was detected (incidence rate ratio = 0.06, 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.13, P < 0.001). Deaths of cardiovascular nature, respiratory origin, sepsis, and multiorgan failure were significantly lower in ß-blocker users, as were the incidences in postoperative infection and anastomotic failure. The ß-blocker positive group had significantly better survival up to 1 year postoperatively with a risk reduction of 57% (hazard ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.52, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative ß-blocker use is strongly associated with improved survival and morbidity after abdominal resection for rectal cancer.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in total hip replacement and total knee replacement surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

Background and purpose - There is a large volume of heterogeneous studies across all Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) components within total hip and total knee replacement surgery. This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature, and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing total hip replacement and total knee replacement with an ERAS program.Methods - Studies were selected with particular attention being paid to meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy of individual items of the perioperative treatment pathway to expedite the achievement of discharge criteria. A consensus recommendation was reached by the group after critical appraisal of the literature.Results - This consensus statement includes 17 topic areas. Best practice includes optimizing preoperative patient education, anesthetic technique, and transfusion strategy, in combination with an opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic approach and early mobilization. There is insufficient evidence to recommend that one surgical technique (type of approach, use of a minimally invasive technique, prosthesis choice, or use of computer-assisted surgery) over another will independently effect achievement of discharge criteria.Interpretation - Based on the evidence available for each element of perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents a comprehensive consensus review, for the perioperative care of patients undergoing total hip replacement and total knee replacement surgery within an ERAS® program. This unified protocol should now be further evaluated in order to refine the protocol and verify the strength of these recommendations.

International validation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guidelines on enhanced recovery for gynecologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society publishes guidelines on perioperative care, but these guidelines should be validated prospectively. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guideline elements and postoperative outcomes in an international cohort. STUDY DESIGN: The study comprised 2101 patients undergoing elective gynecologic/oncology surgery between January 2011 and November 2017 in 10 hospitals across Canada, the United States, and Europe. Patient demographics, surgical/anesthesia details, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol compliance elements (pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases) were entered into the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Interactive Audit System. Surgical complexity was stratified according to the Aletti scoring system (low vs medium/high). The following covariates were accounted for in the analysis: age, body mass index, smoking status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operating time, surgical approach (open vs minimally invasive), intraoperative blood loss, hospital, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation status. The primary end points were primary hospital length of stay and complications. Negative binomial regression was used to model length of stay, and logistic regression to model complications, as a function of compliance score and covariates. RESULTS: Patient demographics included a median age 56 years, 35.5% obese, 15% smokers, and 26.7% American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III-IV. Final diagnosis was malignant in 49% of patients. Laparotomy was used in 75.9% of cases, and the remainder minimally invasive surgery. The majority of cases (86%) were of low complexity (Aletti score ≤3). In patients with ovarian cancer, 69.5% had a medium/high complexity surgery (Aletti score 4-11). Median length of stay was 2 days in the low- and 5 days in the medium/high-complexity group. Every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score was associated with 8% (IRR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.95; P<.001) decrease in days in hospital among low-complexity, and 12% (IRR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.93; P<.001) decrease among patients with medium/high-complexity scores. For every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score, the odds of total complications were estimated to be 12% lower (P<.05) among low-complexity patients. CONCLUSION: Audit of surgical practices demonstrates that improved compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guidelines is associated with an improvement in clinical outcomes, including length of stay, highlighting the importance of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation.

Guidelines for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations-2019 update.

BACKGROUND: This is the first updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery. METHODS: A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed. Studies on each item within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology protocol were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: The updated evidence base and recommendation for items within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.