BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS(®)) pathways have reduced morbidity and length of hospital stay (LOS) in orthopedics, bariatric, and colorectal surgery. New perioperative care protocols have been tested in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), with controversial results on morbidity. Incomplete data about ERAS items compliance have been reported. The aim of this study was to assess compliance with an ERAS protocol and its impact on short-term outcome in patients undergoing PD. METHODS: A comprehensive ERAS protocol was applied in 115 consecutive patients undergoing PD. Each ERAS patient was matched with one patient who received standard perioperative care. Match criteria were age, gender, malignant/benign disease, and PD-specific prognostic score. RESULTS: No adverse effect related to ERAS items occurred. Compliance with postoperative items ranged between 38 and 66 %. The ERAS group had an earlier recovery of mobilization (p < 0.001), oral feeding (p < 0.001), gut motility (p < 0.001), and an earlier suspension of intravenous fluids (p = 0.041). No difference between ERAS and control group was found in mortality, overall morbidity, and major complication rates. Subgroup analysis showed that 43/60 (71 %) patients with early postoperative low compliance with the ERAS pathway had complications. The ERAS pathway significantly shortened LOS in uneventful patients or those with minor complications (11.2 vs. 13.7 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The ERAS pathway was feasible and safe, yielding an earlier postoperative recovery. An ERAS protocol should be implemented in patients undergoing PD; however, patients with early postoperative low compliance should be carefully managed.
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS(®)) pathways have reduced morbidity and length of hospital stay (LOS) in orthopedics, bariatric, and colorectal surgery. New perioperative care protocols have been tested in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), with controversial results on morbidity. Incomplete data about ERAS items compliance have been reported. The aim of this study was to assess compliance with an ERAS protocol and its impact on short-term outcome in patients undergoing PD. METHODS: A comprehensive ERAS protocol was applied in 115 consecutive patients undergoing PD. Each ERASpatient was matched with one patient who received standard perioperative care. Match criteria were age, gender, malignant/benign disease, and PD-specific prognostic score. RESULTS: No adverse effect related to ERAS items occurred. Compliance with postoperative items ranged between 38 and 66 %. The ERAS group had an earlier recovery of mobilization (p < 0.001), oral feeding (p < 0.001), gut motility (p < 0.001), and an earlier suspension of intravenous fluids (p = 0.041). No difference between ERAS and control group was found in mortality, overall morbidity, and major complication rates. Subgroup analysis showed that 43/60 (71 %) patients with early postoperative low compliance with the ERAS pathway had complications. The ERAS pathway significantly shortened LOS in uneventful patients or those with minor complications (11.2 vs. 13.7 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The ERAS pathway was feasible and safe, yielding an earlier postoperative recovery. An ERAS protocol should be implemented in patients undergoing PD; however, patients with early postoperative low compliance should be carefully managed.
Authors: Jordan M Winter; John L Cameron; Kurtis A Campbell; Meghan A Arnold; David C Chang; Joann Coleman; Mary B Hodgin; Patricia K Sauter; Ralph H Hruban; Taylor S Riall; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Keith D Lillemoe; Charles J Yeo Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: K C H Fearon; O Ljungqvist; M Von Meyenfeldt; A Revhaug; C H C Dejong; K Lassen; J Nygren; J Hausel; M Soop; J Andersen; H Kehlet Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2005-04-21 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Eugene P Kennedy; Ernest L Rosato; Patricia K Sauter; Laura M Rosenberg; Cataldo Doria; Ignazio R Marino; Karen A Chojnacki; Adam C Berger; Charles J Yeo Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Kristoffer Lassen; Marielle M E Coolsen; Karem Slim; Francesco Carli; José E de Aguilar-Nascimento; Markus Schäfer; Rowan W Parks; Kenneth C H Fearon; Dileep N Lobo; Nicolas Demartines; Marco Braga; Olle Ljungqvist; Cornelis H C Dejong Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2012-09-26 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: G A Porter; P W Pisters; C Mansyur; A Bisanz; K Reyna; P Stanford; J E Lee; D B Evans Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Michelle L DeOliveira; Jordan M Winter; Markus Schafer; Steven C Cunningham; John L Cameron; Charles J Yeo; Pierre-Alain Clavien Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Marion van der Kolk; Mark van den Boogaard; Femke Becking-Verhaar; Hettie Custers; Hans van der Hoeven; Peter Pickkers; Kees van Laarhoven Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Brian P Chen; Marian Chen; Sean Bennett; Kristina Lemon; Kimberly A Bertens; Fady K Balaa; Guillaume Martel Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.352