Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Efficiency and Safety Effects of Applying ERAS Protocols to Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Evidence

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Obesity Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) to the bariatric surgical procedures is at its early stages with little consolidated evidence. This meta-analysis evaluates present literature and indicates pathways for development of evidence-based standardized ERAS protocols for bariatric surgery. Comparative trials between ERAS and conventional bariatric surgery published till June 2016 were searched in the medical database. Comparisons were made for length of stay (LOS), readmission, complications (major/minor), and reoperation rates. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) for the strength of meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome LOS. Five subgroups with a total of 394 and 471 patients in ERAS and conventional group respectively were included. LOS was shorter in ERAS group by 1.56 ± 0.18 days (random-effects, p < 0.001, I 2 = 93.07 %). The sample size in ERAS was well past the “information size” variable which was calculated to be 189 as per the TSA for power 85%. MH odds ratio [1.41 (95% CI 1.13 to1.76)] was higher for minor complications in the ERAS group (fixed effects, I 2 = 0, p < 0.001). Superiority/inferiority of ERAS could not be established for major or overall complications, readmission, and anastomotic leak rates. No publication bias was found in the included trials (Egger’s test, X-intercept = 6.14, p = 0.66). Evaluation based on Cochrane collaboration recommendations suggested that all the five included trials had a high risk of methodological bias. ERAS protocols for bariatric procedures allow faster return to home for patients. The present bariatric ERAS protocols have high heterogeneity and would benefit from standardization. Minor complication rates increase with implementation of ERAS, however without any significant effect on overall patient morbidity. Further randomized trials comparing ERAS with conventional care are required to consolidate these findings.

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
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth. 1997;78(5):606–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Greco M, Capretti G, Beretta L, et al. Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg. 2014;38(6):1531–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Melnyk M, Casey RG, Black P, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols: time to change practice? Can Urol Assoc J. 2011;5(5):342–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Gurusamy KS, Gluud C, Nikolova D, et al. Assessment of risk of bias in randomized clinical trials in surgery. Br J Surg. 2009;96(4):342–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 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 

  9. Singh PM, Arora S, Borle A, et al. Evaluation of etomidate for seizure duration in electroconvulsive therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J ECT. 2015;31(4):213–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lyass S, Link D, Grace B, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for out-patient laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in ambulatory surgery center—safe and effective. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11(6):S198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lemanu DP, Singh PP, Berridge K, et al. Randomized clinical trial of enhanced recovery versus standard care after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100(4):482–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ronellenfitsch U, Schwarzbach M, Kring A, et al. The effect of clinical pathways for bariatric surgery on perioperative quality of care. Obes Surg. 2012;22(5):732–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mannaerts GHH, van Mil SR, Stepaniak PS, et al. Results of implementing an enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) protocol. Obes Surg. 2016;26(2):303–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Proczko M, Kaska L, Twardowski P, et al. Implementing enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocol: a retrospective study. J Anesth. 2016;30(1):170–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Simonelli V, Goergen M, Orlando GG, et al. Fast-track in bariatric and metabolic surgery: feasibility and cost analysis through a matched-cohort study in a single centre. Obes Surg. 2016;26:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sugisawa N, Tokunaga M, Makuuchi R, et al. A phase II study of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in gastric cancer surgery. Gastric Cancer. 2016;19(3):961–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Li Y, Qiu J, Cao H. Application of enhanced recovery after surgery for patients with laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2016;19(3):269–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Xiong J, Szatmary P, Huang W, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery program in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(18):e3497.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Average cost per inpatient day across 50 states [Internet]. [cited 2016 Jun 22]. Available from: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/average-cost-per-inpatient-day-across-50-states.html.

  20. Livingston EH. The incidence of bariatric surgery has plateaued in the U.S. Am J Surg. 2010;200(3):378–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Stone AB, Grant MC, Pio Roda C, et al. Implementation costs of an enhanced recovery after surgery program in the United States: a financial model and sensitivity analysis based on experiences at a quaternary academic medical center. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(3):219–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesia, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India

    Preet Mohinder Singh, Anuradha Borle & Anjan Trikha

  2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Liver Transplantation, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India

    Rajesh Panwar

  3. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and Perleman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Basavana Goudra

  4. Department of Surgery, OLVG West, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bart A van Wagensveld

  5. Anesthesiology and Perioperative, Medicine, Drexel University College of Medicine, 245 N. 15th Street; MS 310, Philadelphia, PA, 19102, USA

    Ashish Sinha

Authors
  1. Preet Mohinder Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajesh Panwar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anuradha Borle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Basavana Goudra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anjan Trikha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bart A van Wagensveld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ashish Sinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Preet Mohinder Singh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

External Funding

None for any of the authors.

Patient Informed Consent

Not applicable.

Human/Animal Rights Statement

Not applicable.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, P.M., Panwar, R., Borle, A. et al. Efficiency and Safety Effects of Applying ERAS Protocols to Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Evidence. OBES SURG 27, 489–501 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-016-2442-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-016-2442-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation