Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program Effective and Safe in Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program has shown a few advantages in colorectal cancer surgery. However, the effectiveness of the ERAS program in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery is still unclear. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of ERAS program in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery compared with traditional perioperative care (TC).

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for eligible RCTs comparing ERAS program with TC in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. The main outcomes included the average length of postoperative hospital stay (PHS), time to first flatus and defecation, overall complication, readmission, and mortality rates were undertaken.

Results

Thirteen RCTs involving 1298 patients were included in our study (639 in ERAS group and 659 in TC group). ERAS group had shorter average length of PHS (weighted mean difference [WMD] − 2.00 day, 95% confidence interval [CI] − 2.52 to − 1.48, p = 0.00), time to first flatus (WMD − 12.18 h, 95%CI − 16.69 to − 7.67, p = 0.00), and time to first defecation (WMD − 32.93 h, 95%CI − 45.36 to − 20.50, p = 0.00) than TC group. In addition, the overall complication rates (risk ratio [RR] 0.59, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.86, p < 0.01) were significantly lower in ERAS group compared with TC group.

Conclusions

The results indicated that ERAS program is a much better effective and safe protocol for laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery compared with TC. Hence, ERAS program should be recommended in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68: 7–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miller KD, Siegel RL, Lin CC, Mariotto AB, Kramer JL, Rowland JH, Stein KD, Alteri R, Jemal A. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016; 66: 271–289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Allaix ME, Furnee EJ, Mistrangelo M, Arezzo A, Morino M. Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: What is the impact on short-term outcomes and survival? World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 8304–8313.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS. Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surgical laparoscopy & endoscopy 1991; 1: 144–150.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Noel JK, Fahrbach K, Estok R, Cella C, Frame D, Linz H, Cima RR, Dozois EJ, Senagore AJ. Minimally invasive colorectal resection outcomes: short-term comparison with open procedures. J Am Coll Surg 2007; 204: 291–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Junghans T, Raue W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Schwenk W. Value of laparoscopic surgery in elective colorectal surgery with “fast-track”-rehabilitation. Zentralblatt fur chirurgie 2006; 131: 298–303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaltoft B, Gogenur I, Rosenberg J. Reduced length of stay and convalescence in laparoscopic vs open sigmoid resection with traditional care: a double blinded randomized clinical trial. Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland 2011; 13: e123–130.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Coratti F, Coratti A, Malatesti R, Testi W, Tani F. Laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis of the chief trials. Il Giornale di chirurgia 2009; 30: 377–384.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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: 763–764.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M, Revhaug A, Dejong CH, Lassen K, Nygren J, Hausel J, Soop M, Andersen J, Kehlet H. Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) 2005; 24: 466–477.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kehlet H. Fast-track colorectal surgery. Lancet 2008; 371: 791–793.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 606–617.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lassen K, Soop M, Nygren J, Cox PB, Hendry PO, Spies C, von Meyenfeldt MF, Fearon KC, Revhaug A, Norderval S, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN, Dejong CH. Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group recommendations. Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill : 1960) 2009; 144: 961–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilmore DW, Kehlet H. Management of patients in fast track surgery. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 2001; 322: 473–476.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kehlet H. Fast-track colonic surgery: status and perspectives. Recent results in cancer research Fortschritte der Krebsforschung Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer 2005; 165: 8–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Feng F, Li XH, Shi H, Wu GS, Zhang HW, Liu XN, Zhao QC. Fast-track surgery combined with laparoscopy could improve postoperative recovery of low-risk rectal cancer patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of digestive diseases 2014; 15: 306–313.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Taupyk Y, Cao X, Zhao Y, Wang C, Wang Q. Fast-track laparoscopic surgery: a better option for treating colorectal cancer than conventional laparoscopic surgery. Oncology Letters 2015; 10: 443–448.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee SM, Kang SB, Jang JH, Park JS, Hong S, Lee TG, Ahn S. Early rehabilitation versus conventional care after laparoscopic rectal surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Surgical Endoscopy 2013; 27: 3902–3909.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhao JH, Sun JX, Gao P, Chen XW, Song YX, Huang XZ, Xu HM, Wang ZN. Fast-track surgery versus traditional perioperative care in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2014; 14: 607.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Song MX, Li XR. Efficacy of fast track surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic treatment: A meta-analysis. World Chinese Journal of Digestology 2015; 23: 3960–3966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: e1–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 2011; 343: d5928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O. Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS((R))) Society Recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 2018.

  24. Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005; 5: 13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, Tong T. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res 2018; 27: 1785–1805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemp Clin Trials 2015; 45: 139–145.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994; 50: 1088–1101.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stuck AE, Rubenstein LZ, Wieland D. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Asymmetry detected in funnel plot was probably due to true heterogeneity. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 1998; 316: 469; author reply 470-461.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee T-G, Kang S-B, Kim D-W, Hong S, Heo SC, Park KJ. Comparison of Early Mobilization and Diet Rehabilitation Program With Conventional Care After Laparoscopic Colon Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 2011; 54: 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. van Bree SH, Vlug MS, Bemelman WA, Hollmann MW, Ubbink DT, Zwinderman AH, de Jonge WJ, Snoek SA, Bolhuis K, van der Zanden E, The FO, Bennink RJ, Boeckxstaens GE. Faster recovery of gastrointestinal transit after laparoscopy and fast-track care in patients undergoing colonic surgery. Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 872–880.e871–874.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Engel AF, Gerhards MF, van Wagensveld BA, van der Zaag ES, van Geloven AA, Sprangers MA, Cuesta MA, Bemelman WA. 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: 868–875.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang G, Jiang Z-W, Xu J, Gong J-F, Bao Y, Xie L-F, Li J-S. Fast-track rehabilitation program vs conventional care after colorectal resection: A randomized clinical trial. World Journal of Gastroenterology 2011; 17: 671–676.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Veenhof AAFA, Vlug MS, Van Der Pas MHGM, Sietses C, Van Der Peet DL, De Lange-De Klerk ESM, Bonjer HJ, Bemelman WA, Cuesta MA. Surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopy or open surgery with fast track or standard perioperative care: A randomized trial. Annals of Surgery 2012; 255: 216–221.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang G, Jiang Z, Zhao K, Li G, Liu F, Pan H, Li J. Immunologic response after laparoscopic colon cancer operation within an enhanced recovery program. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery 2012; 16: 1379–1388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Q, Suo J, Jiang J, Wang C, Zhao YQ, Cao X. Effectiveness of fast-track rehabilitation vs conventional care in laparoscopic colorectal resection for elderly patients: a randomized trial. Colorectal disease 2012; 14: 1009–1013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Mari GM, Costanzi A, Maggioni D, Origi M, Ferrari GC, De Martini P, De Carli S, Pugliese R. Fast-track versus standard care in laparoscopic high anterior resection: a prospective randomized-controlled trial. Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques 2014; 24: 118–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mari G, Crippa J, Costanzi A, Mazzola M, Rossi M, Maggioni D. ERAS Protocol Reduces IL-6 Secretion in Colorectal Laparoscopic Surgery: results From a Randomized Clinical Trial. Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques 2016; 26: 444–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Shetiwy M, Fady T, Shahatto F, Setit A. Standardizing the protocols for enhanced recovery from colorectal cancer surgery: are we a step closer to ideal recovery? Annals of coloproctology 2017; 33: 86–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Blazeby JM. Systematic review of outcomes used to evaluate enhanced recovery after surgery (Br J Surg 2014; 101: 159-170). Br J Surg 2014; 101: 171.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Carli F. Physiologic considerations of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs: implications of the stress response. Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie 2015; 62: 110–119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Stowers MD, Lemanu DP, Hill AG. Health economics in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programs. Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie 2015; 62: 219–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Li P, Fang F, Cai JX, Tang D, Li QG, Wang DR. Fast-track rehabilitation VS conventional care in laparoscopic colorectal resection for colorectal malignancy: A meta-analysis. World Journal of Gastroenterology 2013; 19: 9119–9126.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Tan SJ, Zhou F, Yui WK, Chen QY, Lin ZL, Hu RY, Gao T, Li N. Fast track programmes vs. traditional care in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hepato-gastroenterology 2014; 61: 79–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Hospital of Jilin University, 71Xinmin Street, Chaoyang District, Changchun, 130021, Jilin Province, China

    Xiaofei Ni, Yan Chen, Lei Wang & Jian Suo

  2. Department of Third Operation Room, First Hospital of Jilin University, 71Xinmin Street, Chaoyang District, Changchun, Jilin Province, China

    Dan Jia

Authors
  1. Xiaofei Ni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Jia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lei Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jian Suo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

XFN and JS: designed the study. XFN and DJ: searched the databases and collected full-text papers. LW and YC: performed statistical analysis. XFN and JS: wrote the manuscript. All authors read the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jian Suo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals

The article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ni, X., Jia, D., Chen, Y. et al. Is the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program Effective and Safe in Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Gastrointest Surg 23, 1502–1512 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-019-04170-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-019-04170-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation