Johannes Petersen1, Benjamin Kloth2, Johanna Konertz2, Jens Kubitz3, Leonie Schulte-Uentrop3, Gesche Ketels4, Hermann Reichenspurner2, Evaldas Girdauskas2. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Heart & Vascular Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. joh.petersen@uke.de. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Heart & Vascular Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Physiotherapy, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) is a multidisciplinary and integrative approach with the goal of optimizing the postoperative recovery. We aimed to analyze the economic impact of a newly established ERAS protocol in minimally invasive heart valve surgery at our institution. METHODS: ERAS protocol was implemented in 61 consecutive patients who were referred for elective minimally-invasive aortic or mitral valve surgery, between February 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019 (ERAS-group). Another 69 patients who underwent elective minimally-invasive heart valve surgery during the same time period were managed according to the hospital standards (Control-group). A detailed cost comparison analysis was carried out from a hospital perspective using a micro-costing approach. RESULTS: The total in-hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ERAS-group compared to the Control-group (6.1 ± 2.6 vs 7.7 ± 3.8 days; p = 0.008) resulting in significant cost savings of €1087.2 per patient (p = 0.003). Due to the intensified physiotherapy in the ERAS protocol, the costs for physiotherapy were €94.3 higher compared to the Control-group (p < 0.001). The total costs in the ERAS cohort were €11,200.0 ± 3029.6/patient compared to € 13,109.8 ± 4527.5/patient in the Control-Group resulting in cost savings of €1909.8 patient due to the implementation of the ERAS protocol (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an ERAS-protocol in minimally-invasive cardiac surgery can be carried out safely with a fast postoperative recovery of the patient. ERAS results in a financial benefit of up to €1909 per patient and therefore will play a key role in modern cardiac surgery in the near future.
BACKGROUND: ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) is a multidisciplinary and integrative approach with the goal of optimizing the postoperative recovery. We aimed to analyze the economic impact of a newly established ERAS protocol in minimally invasive heart valve surgery at our institution. METHODS: ERAS protocol was implemented in 61 consecutive patients who were referred for elective minimally-invasive aortic or mitral valve surgery, between February 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019 (ERAS-group). Another 69 patients who underwent elective minimally-invasive heart valve surgery during the same time period were managed according to the hospital standards (Control-group). A detailed cost comparison analysis was carried out from a hospital perspective using a micro-costing approach. RESULTS: The total in-hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ERAS-group compared to the Control-group (6.1 ± 2.6 vs 7.7 ± 3.8 days; p = 0.008) resulting in significant cost savings of €1087.2 per patient (p = 0.003). Due to the intensified physiotherapy in the ERAS protocol, the costs for physiotherapy were €94.3 higher compared to the Control-group (p < 0.001). The total costs in the ERAS cohort were €11,200.0 ± 3029.6/patient compared to € 13,109.8 ± 4527.5/patient in the Control-Group resulting in cost savings of €1909.8 patient due to the implementation of the ERAS protocol (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an ERAS-protocol in minimally-invasive cardiac surgery can be carried out safely with a fast postoperative recovery of the patient. ERAS results in a financial benefit of up to €1909 per patient and therefore will play a key role in modern cardiac surgery in the near future.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cost analysiss; ERAS; Enhanced recovery after surgery; Minimally invasive cardiac surgery; Perioperative care
Authors: G Nelson; A D Altman; A Nick; L A Meyer; P T Ramirez; C Achtari; J Antrobus; J Huang; M Scott; L Wijk; N Acheson; O Ljungqvist; S C Dowdy Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Joerg Ender; Michael Andrew Borger; Markus Scholz; Anne-Kathrin Funkat; Nadeem Anwar; Marcus Sommer; Friedrich Wilhelm Mohr; Jens Fassl Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Marco Di Eusanio; Walter Vessella; Roberto Carozza; Filippo Capestro; Alessandro D'Alfonso; Carlo Zingaro; Christopher Munch; Paolo Berretta Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: R M Engelman; J A Rousou; J E Flack; D W Deaton; C B Humphrey; L H Ellison; P D Allmendinger; S G Owen; P S Pekow Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Susanne G R Klotz; Gesche Ketels; Christian A Behrendt; Hans-Helmut König; Sebastian Kohlmann; Bernd Löwe; Johannes Petersen; Sina Stock; Eik Vettorazzi; Antonia Zapf; Inke Zastrow; Christian Zöllner; Hermann Reichenspurner; Evaldas Girdauskas Journal: Trials Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 2.728