2017
DOI: 10.1093/dote/dox090
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: The objective of this systematic review is to identify key components of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) that lead to improved length of hospital stay (LOS) following esophagectomy. Relevant electronic databases were searched for studies comparing clinical outcome from esophagectomy followed by a conventional pathway versus ERP. Relevant outcome measures were compared and metaregression was performed to identify the key ERP components associated with reduced in LOS. Thirteen publications were included, ERP w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
21
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A subsequent meta-analysis by Pisarska et al [8], of 2042 patients (1058 in an ERAS group vs 984 in a traditional group), revealed a significantly shorter hospital stay and fewer non-surgical and pulmonary complications in the ERAS group, but no effect on overall morbidity, mortality or readmission rates. Another meta-analysis [9] identified factors that could form the core components of ERAS for esophageal surgery specifically. Standardization of the ERAS protocol should become easier after the recent publication by the ERAS society of the guidelines for perioperative care in esophagectomy [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A subsequent meta-analysis by Pisarska et al [8], of 2042 patients (1058 in an ERAS group vs 984 in a traditional group), revealed a significantly shorter hospital stay and fewer non-surgical and pulmonary complications in the ERAS group, but no effect on overall morbidity, mortality or readmission rates. Another meta-analysis [9] identified factors that could form the core components of ERAS for esophageal surgery specifically. Standardization of the ERAS protocol should become easier after the recent publication by the ERAS society of the guidelines for perioperative care in esophagectomy [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results from this cohort study contradict a meta-analysis I previously published [38], which is likely due to two main reasons. Firstly in this cohort study, approximately 80% of patients underwent salvage oesophagectomy at experienced centres, and benefited from discussion within multidisciplinary team meetings ensuring appropriate patient selection and standardised postoperative protocols to optimise recovery [69]. Secondly, the mediation radiation dose in this cohort study in patients receiving definitive chemoradiotherapy was 50Gy, much lower than those in the majority of studies included in the meta-analysis [38].…”
Section: Study Imentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Two systematic reviews with meta-analysis described the feasibility and safety of ERAS in patients undergoing esophagectomy compared with conventional care. [ 17 , 18 ] Both of them involved only 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT), and most of the studies analyzed were of low quality with high risks of bias, so the level of evidences was limited. Pisarska et al [ 17 ] reported there were significant differences in nonsurgical complications and pulmonary complications between EARS group and conventional care.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pisarska et al [ 17 ] reported there were significant differences in nonsurgical complications and pulmonary complications between EARS group and conventional care. However, Markar et al [ 18 ] got contradictory results in these aspects. It is still unclear how beneficial, and to what extent ERAS really is for esophagectomy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%