World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 230–241 | Cite as

Enhanced Recovery in Liver Transplantation: A Feasibility Study

  • Raffaele Brustia
  • Antoine Monsel
  • Filomena Conti
  • Eric Savier
  • Geraldine Rousseau
  • Fabiano Perdigao
  • Denis Bernard
  • Daniel Eyraud
  • Yann Loncar
  • Olivier Langeron
  • Olivier Scatton
Original Scientific Report



Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes after surgery are effective in reducing length of stay, functional recovery and complication rates in liver surgery (LS) with the indirect advantage of reducing hospitalisation costs. Preoperative comorbidities, challenging surgical procedures and complex post-operative management are the points that liver transplantation (LT) shares with LS. Nevertheless, there is little evidence regarding the feasibility and safety of ERAS programmes in LT.


We designed a pilot, small-scale, feasibility study to assess the impact on hospital stay, protocol compliance and safety of an ERAS programme tailored for LT. The ERAS arm was compared with a 1:2 match paired control arm with similar characteristics. All patients with MELD <25 were included. A dedicated LT-tailored protocol was derived from publications on ERAS liver surgery.


Ten patients were included in the Fast-Trans arm. It was observed a 47% reduction of the total LOS, as compared to the control arm: 9.5 (9.0–10.5) days versus 18.0 (14.3–24.3) days, respectively, p <0.001. The protocol achieved 72.9% compliance. No differences were observed in terms of post-operative complications or readmission rates after discharge between the two arms. Overall, it was observed a reduction of length of stay in ICU and surgical ward in the Fast-Trans arm compared with the control arm.


Considered the main points in common between LS and LT, this small-scale study suggests that the application of an ERAS programme tailored to the LT setting is feasible. Further testing will be appropriate to generalise these findings.


Author contributions

OS, OL, AM and RB conceived and wrote the manuscript. All Authors were in charge of patients, revised and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

268_2018_4747_MOESM1_ESM.doc (80 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 80 kb)


  1. 1.
    Kehlet H (2008) Fast-track colorectal surgery. Lancet 371:791–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M et al (2005) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr 24:466–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F, van Laarhoven CJ (2011) Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16:CD007635Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dokmak S, Ftériche FS, Borscheid R, Cauchy F, Farges O, Belghiti J (2013) 2012 liver resections in the 21st century: we are far from zero mortality. HPB (Oxford) 15:908–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Virani S, Michaelson JS, Hutter MM, Lancaster RT, Warshaw AL, Henderson WG et al (2007) J Am Coll Surg 204:1284–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Margonis GA, Sasaki K, Andreatos N, Nishioka Y, Sugawara T, Amini N et al (2017) Prognostic impact of complications after resection of early stage hepatocellular carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 115:791–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pisarska M, Małczak P, Major P, Wysocki M, Budzyński A, Pędziwiatr M (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in oesophageal cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 12:e0174382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Assen K, Coolsen MM, Slim K, Carli F, de Aguilar-Nascimento JE, Schäfer M et al (2012) ERAS® Society; European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism; International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition. Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations. Clin Nutr 31:817–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Melloul E, Hübner M, Scott M, Snowden C, Prentis J, Dejong CH et al (2016) Guidelines for perioperative care for liver surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) society recommendations. World J Surg 40:2425–2440. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ni TG, Yang HT, Zhang H, Meng HP, Li B (2015) Enhanced recovery after surgery programs in patients undergoing hepatectomy: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 21:9209–9216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xiong J, Szatmary P, Huang W, de la Iglesia-Garcia D, Nunes QM, Xia Q et al (2016) Enhanced recovery after surgery program in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 95:e3497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhuang CL, Ye XZ, Zhang XD, Chen BC, Yu Z (2013) Enhanced recovery after surgery programs versus traditional care for colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum 56:667–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Joliat GR, Labgaa I, Hübner M, Blanc C, Griesser AC, Schäfer M et al (2016) Cost-benefit analysis of the implementation of an enhanced recovery program in liver surgery. World J Surg 40:2441–2450. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Page AJ, Gani F, Crowley KT, Lee KH, Grant MC, Zavadsky TL et al (2016) Patient outcomes and provider perceptions following implementation of a standardized perioperative care pathway for open liver resection. Br J Surg 103:564–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dienstag JL, Cosimi AB (2012) Liver transplantation—a vision realized. N Engl J Med 18(367):1483–1485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Washburn WK, Meo NA, Halff GA, Roberts JP, Feng S (2009) Factors influencing liver transplant length of stay at two large-volume transplant centers. Liver Transpl 15:1570–1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Montano-Loza AJ, Meza-Junco J, Prado CM, Lieffers JR, Baracos VE, Bain VG et al (2012) Muscle wasting is associated with mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 10:166–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Keegan MT, Kramer DJ (2016) Perioperative care of the liver transplant patient. Crit Care Clin 32:453–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mourad MM, Liossis C, Gunson BK, Mergental H, Isaac J, Muiesan P et al (2014) Etiology and management of hepatic artery thrombosis after adult liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 20:713–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Axelrod DA, Lentine KL, Xiao H, Dzebisashvilli N, Schnitzler M, Tuttle-Newhall JE et al (2014) National assessment of early biliary complications following liver transplantation: incidence and outcomes. Liver Transpl 20:446–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang W, Fung J (2017) Limitations of current liver transplant immunosuppressive regimens: renal considerations. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 16:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Adam R, Karam V, Delvart V, O’Grady J, Mirza D, Klempnauer J et al (2012) Evolution of indications and results of liver transplantation in Europe. A report from the european liver transplant registry (ELTR). J Hepatol 57:675–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boraschi P, Della Pina MC, Donati F (2016) Graft complications following orthotopic liver transplantation: role of non-invasive cross-sectional imaging techniques. Eur J Radiol 85:1271–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Glanemann M, Busch T, Neuhaus P, Kaisers U (2007) Fast tracking in liver transplantation. Immediate postoperative tracheal extubation: feasibility and clinical impact. Swiss Med Wkly 137:187–191Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Skurzak S, Stratta C, Schellino MM, Fop F, Andruetto P, Gallo M et al (2010) Extubation score in the operating room after liver transplantation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 54:970–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mandell MS, Lezotte D, Kam I, Zamudio S (2002) Reduced use of intensive care after liver transplantation: influence of early extubation. Liver Transpl 8:676–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Konstantinov IE, McNeil K, Yeung S, Fawcett J, Mullany D, Dunning J (2008) Fast track recovery following en bloc heart-lung-liver transplantation in a patient with cystic fibrosis complicated by severe portal hypertension. Heart Lung Circ 17:154–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rao JH, Zhang F, Lu H, Dai X-Z, Zhang CY, Qian XF et al (2017) Effects of multimodal fast-track surgery on liver transplantation outcomes. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 16:364–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, Cofta-Woerpel L, Linnan L, Weiner D et al (2009) How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med 36:452–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bucur P, Brustia R, Ciacio O, Bivol S, Soggiu F, Sa Cunha A et al (2013) Definition of sarcopenia in cirrhotic patient before liver transplantation. J Hepatol 58:S64 (abstract) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marr KJ, Shaheen AA, Lam L, Stapleton M, Burak K, Raman M (2017) Nutritional status and the performance of multiple bedside tools for nutrition assessment among patients waiting for liver transplantation: a Canadian experience. Clin Nutr ESPEN 17:68–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brustia R, Scatton O (2017) Pretransplant sarcopenia: Suffer or fight? Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 6:260–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Koretz RL, Avenell A, Lipman TO (2012) Nutritional support for liver disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16:CD008344Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brustia R, Savier E, Scatton O (2017) Physical exercise in cirrhotic patients: towards prehabilitation on waiting list for liver transplantation. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol S2210-7401(17):30214Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Coolsen MM, Wong-Lun-Hing EM, van Dam RM, van der Wilt AA, Slim K, Lassen K et al (2013) A systematic review of outcomes in patients undergoing liver surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. HPB (Oxford) 15:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wong-Lun-Hing EM, van Dam RM, Heijnen LA, Busch OR, Terkivatan T, van Hillegersberg R et al (2014) Is current perioperative practice in hepatic surgery based on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) principles? World J Surg 38:1127–1140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    van Dam RM, Wong-Lun-Hing EM, van Breukelen GJ, Stoot JH, van der Vorst JR, Bemelmans MH et al (2012) ORANGE II Study Group. Open versus laparoscopic left lateral hepatic sectionectomy within an enhanced recovery ERAS® programme (ORANGE II-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 13:54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Figueras J, Llado L, Ramos E, Jaurrieta E, Rafecas A, Fabregat J et al (2001) Temporary portocaval shunt during liver transplantation with vena cava preservation. Results of a prospective randomized study. Liver Transpl 7:904–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schultz NA, Larsen PN, Klarskov B, Plum LM, Frederiksen HJ, Christensen BM et al (2013) Evaluation of a fast-track programme for patients undergoing liver resection. Br J Surg 100:138–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J (2011) Enhanced recovery after surgery study group. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg 146:571–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    ERAS Compliance Group (2015) The impact of enhanced recovery protocol compliance on elective colorectal cancer resection: results from an international registry. Ann Surg 261:1153–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schwarz C, Soliman T, Györi G, Silberhumer G, Schoppmann SF, Mühlbacher F et al (2015) Abdominal drainage after liver transplantation from deceased donors. Langenbecks Arch Surg 400:813–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Piñero F, Fauda M, Quiros R, Mendizabal M, González-Campaña A, Czerwonko D et al (2015) Predicting early discharge from hospital after liver transplantation (ERDALT) at a single center: a new model. Ann Hepatol 14:845–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pais R, Fartoux L, Goumard C, Scatton O, Wendum D, Rosmorduc O et al (2017) Temporal trends, clinical patterns and outcomes of NAFLD-related HCC in patients undergoing liver resection over a 20-year period. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 46:856–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Komatsu S, Scatton O, Goumard C, Sepulveda A, Brustia R, Perdigao F et al (2017) Development process and technical aspects of laparoscopic hepatectomy: learning curve based on 15 years of experience. J Am Coll Surg 224:841–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Komatsu S, Brustia R, Goumard C, Perdigao F, Soubrane O, Scatton O (2016) Laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a matched pair analysis. Surg Endosc 30:1965–1974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cauchy F, Brustia R, Perdigao F, Bernard D, Soubrane O, Scatton O (2016) In situ hypothermic perfusion of the liver for complex hepatic resection: surgical refinements. World J Surg 40:1448–1453. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Truant S, Scatton O, Dokmak S, Regimbeau JM, Lucidi V, Laurent A et al (2015) Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS): impact of the inter-stages course on morbi-mortality and implications for management. Eur J Surg Oncol 41:674–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Brustia R, Komatsu S, Goumard C, Bernard D, Soubrane O, Scatton O (2015) From the left to the right: 13-year experience in laparoscopic living donor liver transplantation. Updates Surg 67:193–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Komatsu S, Vicentine FP, El Mouhadi S, Brustia R, Perdigao F, Sepulveda A et al (2016) Improving graft survival by understanding the mechanism of segment 4 complications after split liver transplantation. Clin Transpl 30:1165–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Maffei P, Wiramus S, Bensoussan L, Bienvenu L, Haddad E, Morange S et al (2017) Intensive early rehabilitation in the intensive care unit for liver transplant recipients: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 6:30135Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg 152:292–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Abeles A, Kwasnicki RM, Darzi A (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery: current research insights and future direction. World J Gastrointest Surg 9:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ahmed EA, Montalti R, Nicolini D, Vincenzi P, Coletta M, Vecchi A et al (2016) Fast track program in liver resection: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 95:e4154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wang C, Zheng G, Zhang W, Zhang F, Lv S, Wang A, Fang Z (2017) Enhanced recovery after surgery programs for liver resection: a meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 21:472–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raffaele Brustia
    • 1
    • 4
  • Antoine Monsel
    • 2
    • 4
  • Filomena Conti
    • 3
    • 4
  • Eric Savier
    • 1
  • Geraldine Rousseau
    • 1
    • 4
  • Fabiano Perdigao
    • 1
  • Denis Bernard
    • 2
  • Daniel Eyraud
    • 2
  • Yann Loncar
    • 2
  • Olivier Langeron
    • 2
    • 4
  • Olivier Scatton
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Liver Transplantation Surgical Programme and Hepatobiliary Surgical DepartmentHôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de ParisParisFrance
  2. 2.Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical CareHôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de ParisParisFrance
  3. 3.Liver Transplantation and Hepatology DepartmentHôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de ParisParisFrance
  4. 4.Sorbonne UniversitésParisFrance

Personalised recommendations