Pauline Rouxel1, Helene Beloeil2. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, CHU de Rennes, Université de Rennes, Inserm NumeCan, CIC 1414, 35000 Rennes, France. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, CHU de Rennes, Université de Rennes, Inserm NumeCan, CIC 1414, 35000 Rennes, France. Electronic address: helene.beloeil@chu-rennes.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is a surgery with high postoperative complication rates. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) clinical pathways in liver surgery have been studied and may become a standard of care. However, few specific recommendations have been published so far. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the enhanced recovery program in liver surgery. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS group with traditional care published between 2007 and 2017 were included in this review. The outcomes were length of stay (LoS), complications, mortality and readmission rate for all liver surgeries except transplantation. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-four patients randomised in 4 RCTs were analysed. Two hundred and fifty-four patients were in ERAS group and 270 patients in traditional care (TC) group. Two studies compared cares in laparoscopic surgery and 2 in open surgery. Postoperative LoS was significantly lower in the ERAS group whereas readmission and mortality rate were similar. ERAS group had also significant lower complication rate in 2 studies of the 4. The complication rate in the 2 other studies was similar. CONCLUSION: ERAS protocols in liver surgery appeared to be safe and effective. Recent recommendations from the ERAS group in liver surgery are the only ones published so far. Other studies evaluating ERAS components in liver surgery and recommendations from scientific societies are needed to spread this clinical care pathway.
BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is a surgery with high postoperative complication rates. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) clinical pathways in liver surgery have been studied and may become a standard of care. However, few specific recommendations have been published so far. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the enhanced recovery program in liver surgery. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS group with traditional care published between 2007 and 2017 were included in this review. The outcomes were length of stay (LoS), complications, mortality and readmission rate for all liver surgeries except transplantation. RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-four patients randomised in 4 RCTs were analysed. Two hundred and fifty-four patients were in ERAS group and 270 patients in traditional care (TC) group. Two studies compared cares in laparoscopic surgery and 2 in open surgery. Postoperative LoS was significantly lower in the ERAS group whereas readmission and mortality rate were similar. ERAS group had also significant lower complication rate in 2 studies of the 4. The complication rate in the 2 other studies was similar. CONCLUSION: ERAS protocols in liver surgery appeared to be safe and effective. Recent recommendations from the ERAS group in liver surgery are the only ones published so far. Other studies evaluating ERAS components in liver surgery and recommendations from scientific societies are needed to spread this clinical care pathway.
Authors: Vinzent N Spetzler; Marlene Schepers; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Lutz Fischer; Björn Nashan; Jun Li Journal: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 7.293