Importance: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a global surgical quality improvement initiative now firmly entrenched within the field of perioperative care. Although ERAS is associated with significant clinical outcome improvements and cost savings in numerous surgical specialties, several opportunities and challenges deserve further discussion. Observations: Uptake and implementation of ERAS Society guidelines, together with ERAS-related research, have increased exponentially since the inception of the ERAS movement. Opportunities to further improve patient outcomes include addressing frailty, optimizing nutrition, prehabilitation, correcting preoperative anemia, and improving uptake of ERAS worldwide, including in low- and middle-income countries. Challenges facing enhanced recovery today include implementation, carbohydrate loading, reversal of neuromuscular blockade, and bowel preparation. The COVID-19 pandemic poses both a challenge and an opportunity for ERAS. Conclusions and Relevance: To date, ERAS has achieved significant benefit for patients and health systems; however, improvements are still needed, particularly in the areas of patient optimization and systematic implementation. During this time of global crisis, the ERAS method of delivering care is required to take surgery and anesthesia to the next level and bring improvements in outcomes to both patients and health systems.

Opportunities and Challenges for the Next Phase of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Review.

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a pathway designed to achieve early recovery for patients undergoing major surgery. The ERAS pathway included three important components preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative program. Pre-habilitation and re-habilitation are of paramount importance to improve patients' care. The ERAS is based on evidence-based medicine. Accumulating evidence highlighted that adopting ERAS resulted in lower complication rate, and shorter length of hospital stay in comparison to standard protocols of care. The adoption of the ERAS resulted in a significant improvement of patients' outcomes and a reduction of the overall cost of care. In the present review, we summarized current evidence on ERAS, focusing on the steps useful for its adoption into clinical practice.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in gynecology oncology

BACKGROUND Although there are thousands of published recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines, the extent to which these are supported by high levels of evidence is not known. This study hypothesized that most recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are supported by a low level of evidence. METHODS A registered (Prospero CRD42020202932) systematic review was conducted of anesthesia evidence-based recommendations from the major North American and European anesthesiology societies between January 2010 and September 2020 in PubMed and EMBASE. The level of evidence A, B, or C and the strength of recommendation (strong or weak) for each recommendation was mapped using the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification system or the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The outcome of interest was the proportion of recommendations supported by levels of evidence A, B, and C. Changes in the level of evidence over time were examined. Risk of bias was assessed using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. RESULTS In total, 60 guidelines comprising 2,280 recommendations were reviewed. Level of evidence A supported 16% (363 of 2,280) of total recommendations and 19% (288 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Level of evidence C supported 51% (1,160 of 2,280) of all recommendations and 50% (756 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Of all the guidelines, 73% (44 of 60) had a low risk of bias. The proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.18 to 4.74; P = 0.933) or level of evidence B versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.72 to 3.72; P = 0.243) did not increase in guidelines that were revised. Year of publication was also not associated with increases in the proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A (relative risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.23; P = 0.340) or level of evidence B (relative risk ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.15; P = 0.283) compared to level of evidence C. CONCLUSIONS Half of the recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines are based on a low level of evidence, and this did not change over time. These findings highlight the need for additional efforts to increase the quality of evidence used to guide decision-making in anesthesiology. EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

/pdf/levels-of-evidence-supporting-the-north-american-and-4vkbmpqobp.pdf

Levels of Evidence Supporting the North American and European Perioperative Care Guidelines for Anesthesiologists between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review.

Advances in the management of peritoneal malignancies

Surgical and oncologic outcomes of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for uterine leiomyosarcoma: A systematic review of literature

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown to considerably reduce complications, length of stay and costs after most of surgical procedures by standardised application of best evidence-based perioperative care. The aim was to elaborate dedicated recommendations for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in a two-part series of guidelines based on expert consensus. The present part I of the guidelines highlights preoperative and intraoperative management. Methods The core group assembled a multidisciplinary panel of 24 experts involved in peritoneal surface malignancy surgery representing the fields of general surgery (n = 12), gynaecological surgery (n = 6), and anaesthesia (n = 6). Experts systematically reviewed and summarized the available evidence on 72 identified perioperative care items, following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, evaluation) system. Final consensus (defined as ≥50%, or ≥70% of weak/strong recommendations combined) was reached by a standardised 2-round Delphi process, regarding the strength of recommendations. Results Response rates were 100% for both Delphi rounds. Quality of evidence was evaluated high, moderate low and very low, for 15 (21%), 26 (36%), 29 (40%) and 2 items, respectively. Consensus was reached for 71/72(98.6%) items. Strong recommendations were defined for 37 items, No consensus could be reached regarding the preemptive use of fresh frozen plasma. Conclusion The present ERAS recommendations for CRS±HIPEC are based on a standardised expert consensus process providing clinicians with valuable guidance. There is an urgent need to produce high quality studies for CRS±HIPEC and to prospectively evaluate recommendations in clinical practice.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations - Part I: Preoperative and intraoperative management.

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown to considerably reduce complications, length of stay and costs after most of surgical procedures by standardised application of best evidence-based perioperative care. The aim was to elaborate dedicated recommendations for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in a two-part series of guidelines based on expert consensus. The present part II of the guidelines highlights postoperative management and special considerations. Methods The core group assembled a multidisciplinary panel of 24 experts involved in peritoneal surface malignancy surgery representing the fields of general surgery (n = 12), gynaecological surgery (n = 6), and anaesthesia (n = 6). Experts systematically reviewed and summarized the available evidence on 72 identified perioperative care items, following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, evaluation) system. Final consensus (defined as ≥50%, or ≥70% of weak/strong recommendations combined) was reached by a standardised 2-round Delphi process, regarding the strength of recommendations. Results Response rates were 100% for both Delphi rounds. Quality of evidence was evaluated high, moderate low and very low, for 15 (21%), 26 (36%), 29 (40%) and 2 items, respectively. Consensus was reached for 71/72(98.6%) items. Strong recommendations were defined for 37 items. No consensus could be reached regarding the preemptive use of fresh frozen plasma. Conclusion The present ERAS recommendations for CRS ± HIPEC are based on a standardised expert consensus process providing clinicians with valuable guidance. There is an urgent need to produce high quality studies for CRS ± HIPEC and to prospectively evaluate recommendations in clinical practice.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations - Part II: Postoperative management and special considerations.

Tino Muenster

Papers

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations - Part I: Preoperative and intraoperative management.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations - Part II: Postoperative management and special considerations.