Explore the vast range of titles available.

This is a short overview of the principles of a novel development in surgery called enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. This is an evidence-based approach to perioperative care that has shown to reduce complications and recovery time by 30–50%. The main mechanism is reduction of the stress reactions to the operation. These principles have been shown to be particularly well suited for the compromised patient and hence very good for the elderly people who often have co-morbidities and run a higher risk of complications.

BackgroundAdvantages of robotic technique over laparoscopic technique in rectal tumor surgery have yet to be proven. Large multicenter, register-based cohort studies within an optimized perioperative care protocol are lacking. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare short-term outcomes in robotic, laparoscopic and open rectal tumor resections, while also determining compliance to the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)®Society Guidelines.MethodsAll patients scheduled for rectal tumor resection and consecutively recorded in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System between January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020, were included (N = 3125). Primary outcomes were postoperative complications and length of stay (LOS) and secondary outcomes compliance to the ERAS protocol, conversion to open surgery, symptoms delaying discharge and reoperations. Uni- and multivariate comparisons were used.ResultsRobotic surgery (N = 827) had a similar rate of postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grades 1–5), 35.9% compared to open surgery (N = 1429) 40.9% (OR 1.15, 95% CI (0.93, 1.41)) and laparoscopic surgery (N = 869) 31.2% (OR 0.88, 95% CI (0.71, 1.08)). LOS was longer in the open group, median 9 days (IRR 1.35, 95% CI (1.27, 1.44)) and laparoscopic group, 7 days (IRR 1.14, 95% CI (1.07, 1.21)) compared to the robotic group, 6 days. Pre- and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol were similar between groups.ConclusionsIn this multicenter cohort study, robotic surgery was associated with shorter LOS compared to both laparoscopic and open surgery and had lower conversion rates vs laparoscopic surgery. The rate of complications was similar between groups.

Introduction Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a format for multidisciplinary care and has been shown to predictably improve short term outcomes associated with surgical procedures. Esophagectomy has historically been associated with significant levels of morbidity and mortality and as a result routine application and audit of ERAS guidelines specifically designed for esophageal resection has significant potential to improve outcomes associated with this complex procedure. Methods A team of international experts in the surgical management of esophageal cancer was assembled and the existing literature was identified and reviewed prior to the production of the guidelines. Well established procedure specific components of ERAS were reviewed and updated with changes relevant to esophagectomy. Procedure specific, operative and technical sections were produced utilizing the best current level of evidence. All sections were rated regarding the level of evidence and overall recommendation according to the evaluation (GRADE) system. Results Thirty-nine sections were ultimately produced and assessed for quality of evidence and recommendations. Some sections were completely new to ERAS programs due to the fact that esophagectomy is the first guideline with a thoracic component to the procedure. Conclusions The current ERAS society guidelines should be reviewed and applied in all centers looking to improve outcomes and quality associated with esophageal resection.

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to have a positive impact on outcome. The ERAS care system includes an evidence-based guideline, an implementation program, and an interactive audit system to support practice change. The purpose of this study is to describe the use of the Theoretic Domains Framework (TDF) in changing surgical care and application of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) model to analyze end-to-end implementation of ERAS in colorectal surgery across multiple sites within a single health system. The ultimate intent of this work is to allow for the development of a model for spread, scale, and sustainability of ERAS in Alberta Health Services (AHS). Methods ERAS for colorectal surgery was implemented at two sites and then spread to four additional sites. The ERAS Interactive Audit System (EIAS) was used to assess compliance with the guidelines, length of stay, readmissions, and complications. Data sources informing knowledge translation included surveys, focus groups, interviews, and other qualitative data sources such as minutes and status updates. The QUERI model and TDF were used to thematically analyze 189 documents with 2188 quotes meeting the inclusion criteria. Data sources were analyzed for barriers or enablers, organized into a framework that included individual to organization impact, and areas of focus for guideline implementation. Results Compliance with the evidence-based guidelines for ERAS in colorectal surgery at baseline was 40%. Post implementation compliance, consistent with adoption of best practice, improved to 65%. Barriers and enablers were categorized as clinical practice (22%), individual provider (26%), organization (19%), external environment (7%), and patients (25%). In the Alberta context, 26% of barriers and enablers to ERAS implementation occurred at the site and unit levels, with a provider focus 26% of the time, a patient focus 26% of the time, and a system focus 22% of the time. Conclusions Using the ERAS care system and applying the QUERI model and TDF allow for identification of strategies that can support diffusion and sustainment of innovation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery across multiple sites within a health care system.

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. Methods Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1—Preoperative Care and Part 2—Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. Results Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. Conclusions These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Background Research on risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) alone within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has not yet been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for AL and study short-term outcome after AL in patients operated with anterior resection (AR). Methods All prospectively and consecutively recorded patients operated with AR in the Swedish part of the international ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS) between January 2010 and February 2020 were included. The cohort was evaluated regarding risk factors for AL and short-term outcomes, including uni- and multivariate analysis. Pre-, intra- and postoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines was calculated and evaluated. Results Altogether 1900 patients were included, 155 (8.2%) with AL and 1745 without AL. Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, year of surgery 2016–2020, duration of primary surgery and age remained significant predictors for AL in multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference in overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to ERAS®Society guidelines between groups. Only preadmission patient education remained as a significant ERAS variable associated with less AL. AL was associated with longer length of stay (LOS), higher morbidity rate and higher rate of reoperations. Conclusion Male gender, obesity, peritoneal contamination, duration of surgery, surgery later in study period, age and preadmission patient education were associated with AL in patients operated on with AR. Overall pre- and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol was high in both groups and not associated with AL.

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a perioperative management based on multimodality and multidisciplinary work. ERAS has been shown to have important clinical and economic benefits, but its spread remains slow worldwide. Discussion This manuscript reviews the overall program benefits and focuses on important aspects for implementation well beyond surgery. Summary Implementation of ERAS pathways improves clinical outcomes and induces substantial economic gains. ERAS is the current surgical revolution.