Enhanced recovery programme after colorectal surgery in high-income and low-middle income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal
International journal of surgery (London, England)
ISSN: 1743-9159
Titre abrégé: Int J Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101228232
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Nov 2023
01 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
21
04
2023
accepted:
20
07
2023
medline:
27
11
2023
pubmed:
20
8
2023
entrez:
20
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols strive to optimise outcomes following elective surgery; however, there is a dearth of evidence to support its equitable application and efficacy internationally. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the uptake and impact of ERAS with the aim of highlighting differences in implementation and outcomes across high-income countries (HICs) and low-middle income countries (LMICs). The primary outcome was characterisation of global ERAS uptake. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality and postoperative complications. Three hundred thirty-seven studies with considerable heterogeneity were included in the analysis (291 from HICs, and 46 from LMICs) with a total of 110 190 patients. The weighted median number of implemented elements were similar between HICs and LMICs ( P =0·94), but there was a trend towards greater uptake of less affordable elements across all aspects of the ERAS pathway in HICs. The mean LOS was significantly shorter in patient cohorts in HICs (5·85 days versus 7·17 days in LMICs, P <0·001). The 30-day readmission rate was higher in HICs (8·5 vs. 4·25% in LMICs, P <0·001, but no overall world-wide effect when ERAS compared to controls (OR 1·00, 95% CI: 0·88-1·13). There were no reported differences in complications ( P =0·229) or 30-day mortality ( P =0·949). Considerable variation in the structure, the implementation and outcomes of ERAS exists between HICs and LMICs, where affordable elements are implemented, contributing towards longer LOS in LMICs. Global efforts are required to ensure equitable access, effective ERAS implementation and a higher standard of perioperative care world-wide.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols strive to optimise outcomes following elective surgery; however, there is a dearth of evidence to support its equitable application and efficacy internationally.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the uptake and impact of ERAS with the aim of highlighting differences in implementation and outcomes across high-income countries (HICs) and low-middle income countries (LMICs). The primary outcome was characterisation of global ERAS uptake. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality and postoperative complications.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Three hundred thirty-seven studies with considerable heterogeneity were included in the analysis (291 from HICs, and 46 from LMICs) with a total of 110 190 patients. The weighted median number of implemented elements were similar between HICs and LMICs ( P =0·94), but there was a trend towards greater uptake of less affordable elements across all aspects of the ERAS pathway in HICs. The mean LOS was significantly shorter in patient cohorts in HICs (5·85 days versus 7·17 days in LMICs, P <0·001). The 30-day readmission rate was higher in HICs (8·5 vs. 4·25% in LMICs, P <0·001, but no overall world-wide effect when ERAS compared to controls (OR 1·00, 95% CI: 0·88-1·13). There were no reported differences in complications ( P =0·229) or 30-day mortality ( P =0·949).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Considerable variation in the structure, the implementation and outcomes of ERAS exists between HICs and LMICs, where affordable elements are implemented, contributing towards longer LOS in LMICs. Global efforts are required to ensure equitable access, effective ERAS implementation and a higher standard of perioperative care world-wide.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37598350
doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000644
pii: 01279778-990000000-00560
pmc: PMC10651249
doi:
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3609-3616Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Références
Pearse RM, Clavien PA, Demartines N, et al. Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries. Br J Anaesth 2016;117:601–609.
Meara JG, Leather AJM, Hagander L, et al. Global surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet 2015;386:569–624.
Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P, Jensen P, et al. Recovery after laparoscopic colonic surgery with epidural analgesia, and early oral nutrition and mobilisation. Lancet 1995;345:763–764.
Ni X, Jia D, Chen Y, et al. Is the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program effective and safe in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gastrointest Surg 2019;23:1502–1512.
Greco M, Capretti G, Beretta L, et al. Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg 2014;38:1531–1541.
Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F, et al. Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;16:CD007635.
Chemali ME, Eslick GD. A meta-analysis: postoperative pain management in colorectal surgical patients and the effects on length of stay in an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) setting. Clin J Pain 2017;33:87–92.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 2017;358:j4008.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN. World Economic Situation & Prospects: Report 2021.; 2021. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/publication/world-economic-situation-and-prospects-2019/
Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 2019;43:659–695.
Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019;366:l4898.
Furukawa TA, Barbui C, Cipriani A, et al. Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:7–10.
Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, et al. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res 2018;27:1785–1805.
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–188.
Dudi-Venkata NN, Kroon HM, Bedrikovetski S, et al. Impact of STIMUlant and osmotic LAXatives (STIMULAX trial) on gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery: randomized clinical trial. Br J Surg 2021;108:797–803.
Pache B, Joliat GR, Hübner M, et al. Cost-analysis of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program in gynecologic surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2019;154:388–393.
Miller D, Andriakos P, VanBacker J, et al. Comparison of transversus abdominis plane catheters with thoracic epidurals for cost and length of stay in open colorectal surgeries: a cohort study. BMC Anesthesiol 2021;21:1–7.
Pȩdziwiatr M, Wierdak M, Nowakowski M, et al. Cost minimization analysis of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol: a single-centre, case-matched study. Wideochirurgia I Inne Techniki Maloinwazyjne 2016;11:14–21.
Davis JF, van Rooijen SJ, Grimmett C, et al. From theory to practice: an international approach to establishing prehabilitation programmes. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 2022;12:129–137.
Rollins KE, Javanmard-Emamghissi H, Lobo DN. Impact of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2018;24:519–536.
Schwenk W. Optimized perioperative management (fast-track, ERAS) to enhance postoperative recovery in elective colorectal surgery. GMS Hyg Infect Control 2022;17:Doc10.
Pearse RM, Harrison DA, MacDonald N, et al. Effect of a perioperative, cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm on outcomes following major gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized clinical trial and systematic review. JAMA 2014;311:2181–2190.
Wilms H, Mittal A, Haydock MD, et al. A systematic review of goal directed fluid therapy: rating of evidence for goals and monitoring methods. J Crit Care 2014;29:204–209.
Rollins KE, Mathias NC, Lobo DN. Meta-analysis of goal-directed fluid therapy using transoesophageal Doppler monitoring in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. BJS Open 2019;3:606–616.
Development O for EC operation and. Health expenditure and financing. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SHA
Siddique SM, Tipton K, Leas B, et al. Interventions to reduce hospital length of stay in high-risk populations: a systematic review. JAMA Netw Open 2021;4:1–13.
Mainous AG, Diaz VA, Everett CJ, et al. Impact of insurance and hospital ownership on hospital length of stay among patients with ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Ann Fam Med 2011;9:489–495.
Kohlnhofer BM, Tevis SE, Weber SM, et al. Multiple complications and short length of stay are associated with postoperative readmissions. Am J Surg 2014;207:449–456.
Oodit R, Biccard BM, Panieri E, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective abdominal and pelvic surgery at primary and secondary hospitals in low–middle-income countries (LMIC’s): enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) society recommendation. World J Surg Published online 2022;46:1826–1843.