Implementation of an ERAS program in patients undergoing thoracic surgery at a third-level university hospital. An ambispective cohort study
Soledad Bellas-Cotán, Rubén Casans-Francés, Cristina Ibáñez, Ignacio Muguruza, Luis E. Muñoz-Alameda
To analyze the effects of an ERAS program on complication rates, readmission, and length of stay in patients undergoing pulmonary resection in a tertiary university hospital.
Ambispective cohort study with a prospective arm of 50-patients undergoing thoracic surgery within an ERAS program (ERAS group) versus a retrospective arm of 50-patients undergoing surgery before the protocol was implemented (Standard group). The primary outcome was the number of patients with 30-day surgical complications. Secondary outcomes included ERAS adherence, non-surgical complications, mortality, readmission, reintervention rate, pain, and hospital length of stay. We performed a multivariate logistic analysis to study the correlation between outcomes and ERAS adherence.
In the univariate analysis, we found no difference between the two groups in terms of surgical complications (Standard 18 [36%] vs. ERAS 12 [24%],p = 0.19). In the ERAS group, only the readmission rate was significantly lower (Standard 15 [30%] vs. ERAS 6 [12%], p = 0.03). In the multivariate analysis, ERAS adherence was the only factor associated with a reduction in surgical complications (OR [95% CI] = 0.02 [0.00, 0.59], p = 0.03) and length of stay (HR [95% CI] = 18.5 [4.39, 78.4], p < 0.001).
The ERAS program significantly reduced the readmission rate at our hospital. Adherence to the ERAS protocol reduced surgical complications and length of stay.
1 Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica -SEOM-. Las cifras del cáncer en España, 2020. https://seom.org/seomcms/images/stories/recursos/Cifras_del_cancer_2020.pdf [accessed 5 August 2020].
2 American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Statistics. http://cancerstatisticscenter.cancer.org/ [accessed 5 August 2020].
3 Royal College of Physicians Lung cancer clinical outcomes publication 2018 (for surgical operations performed in 2016) RCP, London (2018)
4 F.F. Chen, D. Zhang, Y.L. Wang, et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy versus open lobectomy in patients with clinical stage Ⅰ non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis Eur J Surg Oncol., 39 (2013), pp. 957-963
5 H. Kehlet Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation Br J Anaesth., 78 (1997), pp. 606-617
6 H Kehlet, DW Wilmore Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery Ann Surg., 248 (2008), pp. 189-198
7 A. Nicholson, M.C. Lowe, J. Parker, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery programmes in surgical patients Br J Surg., 101 (2014), pp. 172-188
8 L. Lee, J. Mata, G.A. Ghitulescu, et al. Cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery versus conventional perioperative management for colorectal surgery Ann Surg., 262 (2015), pp. 1026-1033
9 F. Paton, D. Chambers, P. Wilson, et al. Effectiveness and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery programmes: a rapid evidence synthesis BMJ Open., 4 (2014), Article e005015
10 A. Madani, J.F. Fiore, Y. Wang, et al. An enhanced recovery pathway reduces duration of stay and complications after open pulmonary lobectomy Surgery., 158 (2015), pp. 899-908 discussion 908-910
11 M. Giménez-Milà, A.A. Klein, G. Martinez Design and implementation of an enhanced recovery program in thoracic surgery J Thorac Dis., 8 (2016), pp. S37-45
12 M. Scarci, P. Solli, B. Bedetti Enhanced recovery pathway for thoracic surgery in the UK J Thorac Dis., 8 (2016), pp. S78-83
13 E. Von Elm, D.G. Altman, M. Egger, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies Int J Surg., 12 (2014), pp. 1495-1499
14 M.E. Charlson, P. Pompei, K.L. Ales, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation J Chronic Dis., 40 (1987), pp. 373-383
15 JD. Storey A direct approach to false discovery rates J R Statistical Soc B (Statistical Methodol)., 64 (2002), pp. 479-498
16 R. Casans Francés, J. Ripollés Melchor, A. Abad-Gurumeta, et al. The role of the anaesthesiologist in enhanced recovery programs Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim., 63 (2016), pp. 273-288
17 J. Ripollés-Melchor, J.M. Ramírez-Rodríguez, R. Casans-Francés, et al. Association between use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and postoperative complications in colorectal surgery: the postoperative outcomes within enhanced recovery after surgery protocol (POWER) Study JAMA Surg., 154 (2019), pp. 725-736
18 R.J. Cerfolio, A. Pickens, C. Bass, et al. Fast-tracking pulmonary resections J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg., 122 (2001), pp. 318-324
19 B.M. Muehling, G.L. Halter, H. Schelzig, et al. Reduction of postoperative pulmonary complications after lung surgery using a fast track clinical pathway Eur J Cardiothorac Surg., 34 (2008), pp. 174-180
20 U.O. Gustafsson, J. Hausel, A. Thorell, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery Arch Surg., 146 (2011), pp. 571-577
21 P.J. Agostini, B. Naidu, P. Rajesh, et al. Potentially modifiable factors contribute to limitation in physical activity following thoracotomy and lung resection: a prospective observational study J Cardiothorac Surg., 9 (2014), p. 128
22 JC Das Neves Pereira, P Bagan, AP Coimbra Israel, et al. Fast-track rehabilitation for lung cancer lobectomy: a five-year experience Eur J Cardiothorac Surg., 36 (2009), pp. 383-391
23 L.S. Bjerregaard, K. Jensen, R.H. Petersen, et al. Early chest tube removal after video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy with serous fluid production up to 500 ml/day Eur J Cardiothorac Surg., 45 (2014), pp. 241-246
24 RJ Cerfolio, AS Bryant Results of a prospective algorithm to remove chest tubes after pulmonary resection with high output J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg., 135 (2008), pp. 269-273
25 ERAS Compliance Group The Impact of enhanced recovery protocol compliance on elective colorectal cancer resection: results from an international registry Ann Surg., 261 (2015), pp. 1153-1159
26 M. Bendixen, O.D. Jørgensen, C. Kronborg, et al. Postoperative pain and quality of life after lobectomy via video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery or anterolateral thoracotomy for early stage lung cancer: a randomised controlled trial Lancet Oncol., 17 (2016), pp. 836-844
27 P.E. Falcoz, M. Puyraveau, P.A. Thomas, et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open lobectomy for primary non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity-matched analysis of outcome from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeon database Eur J Cardiothorac Surg., 49 (2016), pp. 602-609
28 V. Puri, A.P. Patel, T.D. Crabtree, et al. Unexpected readmission after lung cancer surgery: a benign event? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg., 150 (2015), pp. 1496-1504 1505.e1-1505; discussion 1504-1505