Mark D Tyson1, Sam S Chang2. 1. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA; Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. Electronic address: tyson.mark@mayo.edu. 2. Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to improve surgical outcomes by reducing variation in perioperative best practices. However, among published studies, results show a striking variation in the effect of ERAS pathways on perioperative outcomes after cystectomy. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of ERAS versus standard care on perioperative outcomes after cystectomy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, and the health-related grey literature in February 2016 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis and the Cochrane Handbook. Studies were reviewed according to criteria from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Thirteen studies (1493 total patients) met the inclusion criteria (ERAS: 801, standard care: 692). A pooled meta-analysis of all comparative studies was performed using inverse-weighted, fixed-effects models, and random-effects models. Publication bias was graphically assessed using contour-enhanced funnel plots and was formally tested using the Harbord modification of the Egger test. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Pooled data showed a lower overall complication rate (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.97, p = 0.017, I2=35.6%), a shorter length of stay (standardized mean difference:-0.87, 95% CI: -1.31 to -0.42, p=0.001, I2=92.8%), and a faster return of bowel function (standardized mean difference: -1.02, 95% CI: -1.69 to -0.34, p=0.003, I2=92.2%) in the ERAS group. No difference was noted for the overall readmission rates (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.39-1.41, p=0.36, I2=51.4%), although a stratified analysis showed a lower 30-d readmission rate in the ERAS group (RR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.19-0.83, p=0.015, I2=0%). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocols reduce the length of stay, time-to-bowel function, and rate of complications after cystectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways for cystectomy reduce complications and the amount of time patients spend in the hospital.
CONTEXT: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to improve surgical outcomes by reducing variation in perioperative best practices. However, among published studies, results show a striking variation in the effect of ERAS pathways on perioperative outcomes after cystectomy. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of ERAS versus standard care on perioperative outcomes after cystectomy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, and the health-related grey literature in February 2016 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis and the Cochrane Handbook. Studies were reviewed according to criteria from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Thirteen studies (1493 total patients) met the inclusion criteria (ERAS: 801, standard care: 692). A pooled meta-analysis of all comparative studies was performed using inverse-weighted, fixed-effects models, and random-effects models. Publication bias was graphically assessed using contour-enhanced funnel plots and was formally tested using the Harbord modification of the Egger test. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Pooled data showed a lower overall complication rate (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.97, p = 0.017, I2=35.6%), a shorter length of stay (standardized mean difference:-0.87, 95% CI: -1.31 to -0.42, p=0.001, I2=92.8%), and a faster return of bowel function (standardized mean difference: -1.02, 95% CI: -1.69 to -0.34, p=0.003, I2=92.2%) in the ERAS group. No difference was noted for the overall readmission rates (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.39-1.41, p=0.36, I2=51.4%), although a stratified analysis showed a lower 30-d readmission rate in the ERAS group (RR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.19-0.83, p=0.015, I2=0%). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocols reduce the length of stay, time-to-bowel function, and rate of complications after cystectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways for cystectomy reduce complications and the amount of time patients spend in the hospital.
Authors: A Karl; A Buchner; A Becker; M Staehler; M Seitz; W Khoder; B Schneevoigt; E Weninger; P Rittler; T Grimm; C Gratzke; C Stief Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-08-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Anthony Koupparis; Christian Villeda-Sandoval; Nicola Weale; Motaz El-Mahdy; David Gillatt; Edward Rowe Journal: BJU Int Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Julian Smith; Zhao Wu Meng; Richard Lockyer; Tim Dudderidge; John McGrath; Matthew Hayes; Brian Birch Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-07-27 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: David Moher; Larissa Shamseer; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2015-01-01
Authors: Girish S Kulkarni; Peter C Black; Srikala S Sridhar; Anil Kapoor; Alexandre R Zlotta; Bobby Shayegan; Ricardo A Rendon; Peter Chung; Theodorus van der Kwast; Nimira Alimohamed; Yves Fradet; Wassim Kassouf Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Sephalie Y Patel; Rosemarie E Garcia Getting; Brandon Alford; Karim Hussein; Braydon J Schaible; David Boulware; Jae K Lee; Scott M Gilbert; Julio M Powsang; Wade J Sexton; Philippe E Spiess; Michael A Poch Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Sebastian Karl Frees; Jonathan Aning; Peter Black; Werner Struss; Robert Bell; Claudia Chavez-Munoz; Martin Gleave; Alan I So Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 4.226