Why the study?
Does an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program reduce length of hospital stay and improve outcomes in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy?
Does an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program reduce length of hospital stay and improve outcomes in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy?
Implementing an ERAS program for pancreaticoduodenectomy significantly reduces length of hospital stay without compromising patient safety or increasing readmissions.
ERAS was associated with shorter LOS after pancreaticoduodenectomy; hypothesis-generating and requires RCTs before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomies (PDs) are complex surgical procedures that require high-standard perioperative care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of implementing an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program for PD on patient outcome. METHODS: 230 patients undergoing PD in the Maastricht University Medical Centre between January 1995 and January 2012 were included. Group 1 (no ERAS; 1995-2005) received traditional care. From January 2006, several elements of an ERAS pathway for pancreatic surgery were implemented (group 2: 'ERAS-like'). From 2009 onwards the ERAS pathway was fully implemented (group 3: ERAS). Mortality, complications, readmissions and length of hospital stay (LOS) were evaluated in the subgroups and compared. RESULTS: Median LOS was significantly reduced from 20 days in group 1 to 13 days in group 2 and 14 days in group 3 (p = 0.001). Median LOS of patients without complications was 16, 10 and 9 days in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively (p < 0.0001). Over time, the average age of patients undergoing PD increased significantly. Complication rates as well as mortality and readmission rates did not change over time. CONCLUSION: Implementing an ERAS program contributed to a decrease of LOS without compromising other outcomes. Mortality, morbidity and readmission rates stayed unchanged and more complications were managed non-operatively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coolsen et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: