Why the study?
Does fast track surgery (ERAS) reduce complications and length of stay compared to conventional recovery strategies in patients undergoing colorectal surgery?
Does fast track surgery (ERAS) reduce complications and length of stay compared to conventional recovery strategies in patients undergoing colorectal surgery?
Does not yet justify ERAS as standard care in colorectal surgery; low-quality trials leave benefits open.
The quantity and especially quality of data are low. Analysis shows a reduction in overall complications, but major complications were not reduced. Length of stay was reduced significantly. We state that ERAS seems safe, but the quality of trials and lack of sufficient other outcome parameters do not justify implementation of ERAS as the standard of care. Within ERAS protocols included, no answer regarding the role for minimally invasive surgery (i.e. laparoscopy) was found. Furthermore, protocol compliance within ERAS programs has not been investigated, while this seems a known problem in the field. Therefore, more specific and large RCT's are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Spanjersberg et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: