Enhanced Recovery After Minimally Invasive Surgery (ERAmiS) for Gynecology

Gynecologic Oncology (A Fader, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Gynecologic Oncology


Purpose of Review

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs are mechanisms for achieving multimodal, evidence-based reductions in surgical stress and value-based improvements in perioperative care. Implementation of these programs has been shown to significantly decrease narcotics utilization, perioperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and cost of care. This review summarizes the origins and penetrance of ERAS programs into the field of gynecology to date. It presents the rationale and basic construct for an ERAS program customized for gynecologic minimally invasive surgery (MIS), with special focus on patient education, preoperative oral hydration and carbohydrate loading, multimodal pain control, and goal-directed fluid therapy. Key determinants of success, such as compliance monitoring, are discussed. Outcome measures and instruments for their assessment relevant to MIS are also explored.

Recent Findings

ERAS guidelines dedicated to MIS for benign and malignant gynecologic conditions are non-existent. Rather, patients undergoing MIS procedures have largely been co-managed with patients undergoing open gynecologic surgery on ERAS pathways which have been extrapolated from colorectal surgery. While some ERAS pathway elements likely provide benefit independent of surgical approach, others should be uniquely adapted to MIS. The strength of findings related to ERAS in the gynecologic literature has been undercut by a lack of compliance monitoring. Fixing this deficiency as well as using instruments that assess postoperative recovery as a multidimensional construct will afford a more complete understanding of the benefits and flaws of ERAmiS pathways so that they can continue to evolve. ERAmiS in gynecology has the potential to be a valuable mechanism for addressing the underutilization of MIS, over-prescribing of opioid pain medication, and need for more rigorous surgical research in our field.


Given the known benefits of ERAS program utilization for women undergoing open gynecologic surgery, ERAS programs for gynecologic MIS (ERAmiS) should be explored and formalized. Recognizing that MIS alone confers many clinical gains, including decreased LOS, surgical complications, and readmission rates, ERAmiS should target more sophisticated and patient-oriented outcome measures than those traditionally selected for open gynecologic surgery.


ERAmiS Enhanced recovery after surgery MIS Minimally invasive hysterectomy ERAS Open gynecologic surgery 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Rebecca Stone declares no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    Mehta A, et al. Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(5):497 e491–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Price JT, et al. Social determinants of access to minimally invasive hysterectomy: reevaluating the relationship between race and route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(5):572 e571–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA surgery. 2017;152(3):292–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P, Jensen P, Crawford ME, Kehlet H. Recovery after laparoscopic colonic surgery with epidural analgesia, and early oral nutrition and mobilisation. Lancet. 1995;345(8952):763–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kehlet H, Mogensen T. Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br J Surg. 1999;86(2):227–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS. Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991;1(3):144–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    • Pache B, Hubner M, Jurt J, Demartines N, Grass F. Minimally invasive surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery: the ideal combination? J Surg Oncol. 2017;116(5):613–6. This review provides support for developing ERAS programs for MIS CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Engel AF, et al. Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg. 2011;254(6):868–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pedziwiatr M, et al. ERAS protocol in laparoscopic surgery for colonic versus rectal carcinoma: are there differences in short-term outcomes? Med Oncol. 2016;33(6):56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    • de Groot JJ, et al. Enhanced recovery pathways in abdominal gynecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(4):382–95. This is the only systematic review and meta-analysis of ERAS in gynecologic surgery to date. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    • Chapman JS, Roddy E, Ueda S, Brooks R, Chen LL, Chen LM. Enhanced recovery pathways for improving outcomes after minimally invasive gynecologic oncology surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(1):138–44. One of few retrospective cohort studies to date demonstrating the potential benefits of a gynecologic ERA miS pathway CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    • Modesitt SC, Sarosiek BM, Trowbridge ER, Redick DL, Shah PM, Thiele RH, et al. Enhanced recovery implementation in major gynecologic surgeries: effect of care standardization. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(3):457–66. One of few retrospective cohort studies to date demonstrating the potential benefits of a gynecologic ERA miS pathway CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    • Trowbridge ER, et al. Review of enhanced recovery programs in benign gynecologic surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2017; This review helps identify which the core ERA mi S components. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ottesen M, Sorensen M, Rasmussen Y, Smidt-Jensen S, Kehlet H, Ottesen B. Fast track vaginal surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81(2):138–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yoong W, Sivashanmugarajan V, Relph S, Bell A, Fajemirokun E, Davies T, et al. Can enhanced recovery pathways improve outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy? Cohort control study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(1):83–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    • Ravndal C, Vandrevala T. Preemptive local anesthetic in gynecologic laparoscopy and postoperative movement-evoked pain: a randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(5):775–80. One of the only randomized controlled trials to evaluate an intervention for pain management with in the context of an ERAS program CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leissner KB, Shanahan JL, Bekker PL, Amirfarzan H. Enhanced recovery after surgery in laparoscopic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. Part A. 2017;27(9):883–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Scott MJ, Fawcett WJ. Oral carbohydrate preload drink for major surgery—the first steps from famine to feast. Anaesthesia. 2014;69(12):1308–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):571–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith MD, et al. Preoperative carbohydrate treatment for enhancing recovery after elective surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;8:CD009161.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ljungqvist O, Soreide E. Preoperative fasting. Br J Surg. 2003;90(4):400–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sarin A, Chen LL, Wick EC. Enhanced recovery after surgery-preoperative fasting and glucose loading—a review. J Surg Oncol. 2017;116(5):578–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gustafsson UO, et al. Pre-operative carbohydrate loading may be used in type 2 diabetes patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52(7):946–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brummett CM, Waljee JF, Goesling J, Moser S, Lin P, Englesbe MJ, et al. New persistent opioid use after minor and major surgical procedures in US adults. JAMA surgery. 2017;152(6):e170504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee JS, et al. New persistent opioid use among patients with cancer after curative-intent surgery. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2017;35(36):4042–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Griffith KC, Clark NV, Zuckerman AL, Ferzandi TR, & Wright KN. Opioid prescription and patient use following gynecologic procedures: a survey of patients and providers. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    As-Sanie S, Till SR, Mowers EL, Lim CS, Skinner BD, Fritsch L, et al. Opioid prescribing patterns, patient use, and postoperative pain after hysterectomy for benign indications. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(6):1261–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Osmundson SS, Schornack LA, Grasch JL, Zuckerwise LC, Young JL, Richardson MG. Postdischarge opioid use after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(1):36–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wilson JL, et al. Opioid use among same-day surgery patients: prevalence, management and outcomes. Pain Res Manag. 2015;20(6):300–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Buvanendran A, Kroin JS. Multimodal analgesia for controlling acute postoperative pain. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(5):588–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Helander EM, et al. A comparison of multimodal analgesic approaches in institutional enhanced recovery after surgery protocols for colorectal surgery: pharmacological agents. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A. 2017;27(9):903–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winkelmayer WC, Waikar SS, Mogun H, Solomon DH. Nonselective and cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs and acute kidney injury. Am J Med. 2008;121(12):1092–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nimmo SM, Foo ITH, Paterson HM. Enhanced recovery after surgery: pain management. J Surg Oncol. 2017;116(5):583–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cobby TF, Crighton IM, Kyriakides K, Hobbs GJ. Rectal paracetamol has a significant morphine-sparing effect after hysterectomy. Br J Anaesth. 1999;83(2):253–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ong CK, Seymour RA, Lirk P, Merry AF. Combining paracetamol (acetaminophen) with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs: a qualitative systematic review of analgesic efficacy for acute postoperative pain. Anesth Analg. 2010;110(4):1170–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Montgomery JE, Sutherland CJ, Kestin IG, Sneyd JR. Morphine consumption in patients receiving rectal paracetamol and diclofenac alone and in combination. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77(4):445–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rorarius MG, et al. Gabapentin for the prevention of postoperative pain after vaginal hysterectomy. Pain. 2004;110(1–2):175–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jokela R, Ahonen J, Tallgren M, Haanpaa M, Korttila K. A randomized controlled trial of perioperative administration of pregabalin for pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy. Pain. 2008;134(1–2):106–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rahiri J, Tuhoe J, Svirskis D, Lightfoot NJ, Lirk PB, Hill AG. Systematic review of the systemic concentrations of local anaesthetic after transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118(4):517–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    De Oliveira GS Jr, Castro-Alves LJ, Nader A, Kendall MC, McCarthy RJ. Transversus abdominis plane block to ameliorate postoperative pain outcomes after laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg. 2014;118(2):454–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Seagle BL, Miller ES, Strohl AE, Hoekstra A, Shahabi S. Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine compared to oral opioids alone for acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy for early endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Gynecol Oncol Res Pract. 2017;4:12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kranke P, et al. Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;7:CD009642.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Herling SF, Dreijer B, Wrist Lam G, Thomsen T, Moller AM. Total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD011387.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li M, et al. Propofol reduces early post-operative pain after gynecological laparoscopy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012;56(3):368–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nishikawa K, Nakayama M, Omote K, Namiki A. Recovery characteristics and post-operative delirium after long-duration laparoscope-assisted surgery in elderly patients: propofol-based vs. sevoflurane-based anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004;48(2):162–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Miller TE, Roche AM, Mythen M. Fluid management and goal-directed therapy as an adjunct to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie. 2015;62(2):158–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Brandstrup B, Tønnesen H, Beier-Holgersen R, Hjortsø E, Ørding H, Lindorff-Larsen K, et al. Effects of intravenous fluid restriction on postoperative complications: comparison of two perioperative fluid regimens: a randomized assessor-blinded multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2003;238(5):641–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Cannesson M, Pestel G, Ricks C, Hoeft A, Perel A. Hemodynamic monitoring and management in patients undergoing high risk surgery: a survey among North American and European anesthesiologists. Crit Care. 2011;15(4):R197.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Osman D, Ridel C, Ray P, Monnet X, Anguel N, Richard C, et al. Cardiac filling pressures are not appropriate to predict hemodynamic response to volume challenge. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(1):64–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest. 2008;134(1):172–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kheterpal S, Tremper KK, Englesbe MJ, O’Reilly M, Shanks AM, Fetterman DM, et al. Predictors of postoperative acute renal failure after noncardiac surgery in patients with previously normal renal function. Anesthesiology. 2007;107(6):892–902.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(9):2642–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Srinivasa S, Taylor MHG, Singh PP, Yu TC, Soop M, Hill AG. Randomized clinical trial of goal-directed fluid therapy within an enhanced recovery protocol for elective colectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100(1):66–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Phan TD, D'Souza B, Rattray MJ, Johnston MJ, Cowie BS. A randomised controlled trial of fluid restriction compared to oesophageal Doppler-guided goal-directed fluid therapy in elective major colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2014;42(6):752–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bergstrom J SM, Alimi Y, Yen T, Hobson J, Machado K, Tanner E, Fader A, Temkin S, Wethington S, Levinson K, Stone R. Narcotics reduction, quality and safety in gynecologic oncology surgery in the first year of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol implementation. submitted to Gynecol Oncol. 2018Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Veenhof AA, et al. Surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopy or open surgery with fast track or standard perioperative care: a randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2012;255(2):216–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jurt J, Slieker J, Frauche P, Addor V, Solà J, Demartines N, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery: can we rely on the key factors or do we need the bel ensemble? World J Surg. 2017;41(10):2464–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gustafsson UO, Oppelstrup H, Thorell A, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O. Adherence to the ERAS protocol is associated with 5-year survival after colorectal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study. World J Surg. 2016;40(7):1741–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pedziwiatr M, et al. Is ERAS in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer changing risk factors for delayed recovery? Med Oncol. 2016;33(3):25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Moffatt-Bruce SD, Hilligoss B, Gonsenhauser I. ERAS: safety checklists, antibiotics, and VTE prophylaxis. J Surg Oncol. 2017;116(5):601–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gould MK, Garcia DA, Wren SM, Karanicolas PJ, Arcelus JI, Heit JA, et al. Prevention of VTE in nonorthopedic surgical patients: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e227S–77S.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bouchard-Fortier G, Geerts WH, Covens A, Vicus D, Kupets R, Gien LT. Is venous thromboprophylaxis necessary in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for a gynecologic malignancy? Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(2):228–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Freeman AH, Barrie A, Lyon L, Littell RD, Garcia C, Conell C, et al. Venous thromboembolism following minimally invasive surgery among women with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;142(2):267–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Mahdi H, Aljebori Q, Lockart D, Moulton L. Risk of venous thromboembolism after laparoscopic surgery for gynecologic malignancy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(7):1057–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nick AM, Schmeler KM, Frumovitz MM, Soliman PT, Spannuth WA, Burzawa JK, et al. Risk of thromboembolic disease in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(4):956–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Sandadi S, Lee S, Walter A, Gardner GJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y, et al. Incidence of venous thromboembolism after minimally invasive surgery in patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1077–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kumar S, al-Wahab Z, Sarangi S, Woelk J, Morris R, Munkarah A, et al. Risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism after minimally invasive surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer is low: a multi-institutional study. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;130(1):207–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Barber EL, Gehrig PA, Clarke-Pearson DL. Venous thromboembolism in minimally invasive compared with open hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(1):121–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kim JS, et al. Venous thromboembolism in patients receiving extended pharmacologic prophylaxis after robotic surgery for endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2017;27(8):1774–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Feldman LS, Lee L, Fiore J Jr. What outcomes are important in the assessment of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways? Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie. 2015;62(2):120–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lehmann N, Joshi GP, Dirkmann D, Weiss M, Gulur P, Peters J, et al. Development and longitudinal validation of the overall benefit of analgesia score: a simple multi-dimensional quality assessment instrument. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(4):511–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Bowyer A, Jakobsson J, Ljungqvist O, Royse C. A review of the scope and measurement of postoperative quality of recovery. Anaesthesia. 2014;69(11):1266–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Jakobsson J. Assessing recovery after ambulatory anaesthesia, measures of resumption of activities of daily living. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2011;24(6):601–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Neville A, Lee L, Antonescu I, Mayo NE, Vassiliou MC, Fried GM, et al. Systematic review of outcomes used to evaluate enhanced recovery after surgery. Br J Surg. 2014;101(3):159–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kluivers KB, Riphagen I, Vierhout ME, Brolmann HA, de Vet HC. Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments. Surgery. 2008;143(2):206–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.John’s Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations