Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
EP129 Comparison of enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional anesthesia technique on postoperative recovery in the patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
EP129 Comparison of enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional anesthesia technique on postoperative recovery in the patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries
Do you wish to request the book?
EP129 Comparison of enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional anesthesia technique on postoperative recovery in the patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
EP129 Comparison of enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional anesthesia technique on postoperative recovery in the patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries
2025
Overview
Background and AimsEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multidisciplinary, evidence-based protocol involving perioperative interventions to improve recovery. Although ERAS has been applied in neurosurgical procedures especially craniotomies, its role in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries remains unclear. This study aimed to establish the role of ERAS versus conventional anaesthetic care on postoperative recovery in such procedures.Methods60 participants (30 in each group) were randomly divided into two groups: Group I (ERAS protocol) and group II (Conventional anaesthetic technique)[figure 1]. The primary objective was to compare the difference between quality of postoperative recovery using Quality of recovery (QoR 15) scoring system in both the groups. The secondary objectives were to compare the day of ambulation, duration of hospital stay and postoperative pain scores.ResultsQoR15 score was comparable between both the groups at the baseline (p value 0.473). At 24 hours postoperatively, mean QoR 15 score was slightly higher in ERAS group (98.40±4.45) as compared to conventional group (96.56±4.40), but this difference was not statistically significant (p-value=0.11). ERAS patients ambulated earlier 2.30±0.535 days vs 3.30±0.915 days in conventional group with statistically significant difference (p<0.001) but the duration of hospital stay remained statistically non-significant (ERAS vs Conventional, 5.20±0.761 vs 5.47±0.86, mean difference = -0.27, p=0.209). NRS showed a tendency towards low pain scores in the ERAS group as compared to conventional group at all the time points from 1 hour to 24 hours post-surgery with p<0.001, showing statistically significant difference.Abstract EP129 Figure 1Institutional ethical committee certificate[Image Omitted. See PDF.]ConclusionsERAS protocol did not confer early recovery benefit as compared to conventional anaesthesia technique within first 24 hours postoperatively as measured by QoR 15 score in patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries. However, ERAS offers significant advantages over conventional technique in terms of earlier ambulation and better pain management till 24 postoperative hours.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subject
