Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in radical gastrectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis
  1. Huang Changsheng1,
  2. Shao Shengli2,
  3. Feng Yongdong2
  1. 1Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
  2. 2Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
  1. Correspondence to Professor Feng Yongdong, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 40030, China; ydfeng{at}tjh.tjmu.edu.cn

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to assess the safety and efficiency of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in radical gastrectomy.

Methods Studies published before February 2019 were searched from EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Quanfang databases without language and region restrictions. A total of 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 1216 participants were included in the analysis, of whom 605 underwent ERAS protocol and 611 received traditional perioperative treatment for radical gastrectomy.

Results There was a significant reduction in pulmonary infection (p=0.02) after radical gastrectomy. Further, there was a significant decrease in the length of postoperative hospital days (p<0.00001), first passage time of defection and flatus (p<0.00001), and medical cost (p<0.0001) in the group that received the ERAS protocol. However, the ERAS protocol group had a higher risk for readmission (p=0.007), vomiting (p=0.002) and gastric retention (p=0.0003) compared with the traditional treatment group.

Conclusions ERAS protocol application for radical gastrectomy accelerated postoperative recovery, shortened postoperative hospital days and first passage time of defection and flatus, and saved on medical costs, and did not increase the occurrence rate of severe complications.

  • gastrointestinal tumours
  • health economics
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors HC and SS conceived, designed and interpreted the results, analysed the data and drafted this paper. The two authors equally contributed to this work. FY conceived the study, interpreted the results and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the submission for this paper.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.