INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) reduces postoperative length of hospital stay and patient stress response to liver surgery. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of an ERAS programme for liver resection. METHODS: A multidisciplinary ERAS protocol was implemented for both open and laparoscopic liver resection in a tertiary hospital in Hong Kong. The clinical outcomes of patients who underwent liver resection and underwent the ERAS perioperative programme were compared with those who received a conventional perioperative programme between September 2015 and July 2016. Propensity score matching analysis was used to minimise background differences. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients who underwent liver resection were recruited to the ERAS programme. Their clinical outcomes were compared with another 20 patients who received hepatectomy under a conventional perioperative programme after propensity score matching. The ERAS programme was associated with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (P=0.033) without an increase in complication rates in patients who underwent open liver resection. There was no such significant association in patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection. No patients required readmission in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The ERAS perioperative programme for liver resection is safe and feasible. It significantly shortened the hospital stay after open liver resection but not after laparoscopic liver resection.
INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) reduces postoperative length of hospital stay and patient stress response to liver surgery. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of an ERAS programme for liver resection. METHODS: A multidisciplinary ERAS protocol was implemented for both open and laparoscopic liver resection in a tertiary hospital in Hong Kong. The clinical outcomes of patients who underwent liver resection and underwent the ERAS perioperative programme were compared with those who received a conventional perioperative programme between September 2015 and July 2016. Propensity score matching analysis was used to minimise background differences. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients who underwent liver resection were recruited to the ERAS programme. Their clinical outcomes were compared with another 20 patients who received hepatectomy under a conventional perioperative programme after propensity score matching. The ERAS programme was associated with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (P=0.033) without an increase in complication rates in patients who underwent open liver resection. There was no such significant association in patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection. No patients required readmission in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The ERAS perioperative programme for liver resection is safe and feasible. It significantly shortened the hospital stay after open liver resection but not after laparoscopic liver resection.
Entities:
Keywords:
Hepatectomy; Length of stay; Perioperative care
Authors: Laura van Wijk; Stijn van Duinhoven; Mike S L Liem; Donald E Bouman; Alain R Viddeleer; Joost M Klaase Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 2.175