手术后的强化恢复方案:心脏手术随机试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
World Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1002/wjs.12122
Cristiano Spadaccio, Antonio Salsano, Angelo Pisani, Antonio Nenna, Francesco Nappi, Asishana Osho, David D'Alessandro, Thoralf M Sundt, Juan Crestanello, Daniel Engelman, David Rose
{"title":"手术后的强化恢复方案:心脏手术随机试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Cristiano Spadaccio, Antonio Salsano, Angelo Pisani, Antonio Nenna, Francesco Nappi, Asishana Osho, David D'Alessandro, Thoralf M Sundt, Juan Crestanello, Daniel Engelman, David Rose","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous meta-analyses combining randomized and observational evidence in cardiac surgery have shown positive impact of enhanced recovery protocols after surgery (ERAS) on postoperative outcomes. However, definitive data based on randomized studies are missing, and the entirety of the ERAS measures and pathway, as recently systematized in guidelines and consensus statements, have not been captured in the published studies. The available literature actually focuses on \"ERAS-like\" protocols or only limited number of ERAS measures. This study aims at analyzing all randomized studies applying ERAS-like protocols in cardiac surgery for perioperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS-like with standard protocols of perioperative care was performed (PROSPERO registration CRD42021283765). PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting and assessing data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen single center RCTs (N = 1704, 850 in ERAS-like protocol and 854 in the standard care group) were selected. The most common procedures were surgical revascularization (66.3%) and valvular surgery (24.9%). No difference was found in the incidence of inhospital mortality between the ERAS and standard treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0.61 [0.31; 1.20], p = 0.15). ERAS was associated with reduced intensive care unit (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.57, p < 0.01) and hospital stay (SMD -0.23, p < 0.01) and reduced rates of overall complications when compared to the standard protocol (RR 0.60, p < 0.01) driven by the reduction in stroke (RR 0.29 [0.13; 0.62], p < 0.01). A significant heterogeneity in terms of the elements of the ERAS protocol included in the studies was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ERAS-like protocols have no impact on short-term survival after cardiac surgery but allows for a faster hospital discharge while potentially reducing surgical complications. However, this study highlights a significant nonadherence and heterogeneity to the entirety of ERAS protocols warranting further RCTs in this field including a greater number of elements of the framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":23926,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"779-790"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhanced recovery protocols after surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials in cardiac surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Cristiano Spadaccio, Antonio Salsano, Angelo Pisani, Antonio Nenna, Francesco Nappi, Asishana Osho, David D'Alessandro, Thoralf M Sundt, Juan Crestanello, Daniel Engelman, David Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wjs.12122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous meta-analyses combining randomized and observational evidence in cardiac surgery have shown positive impact of enhanced recovery protocols after surgery (ERAS) on postoperative outcomes. However, definitive data based on randomized studies are missing, and the entirety of the ERAS measures and pathway, as recently systematized in guidelines and consensus statements, have not been captured in the published studies. The available literature actually focuses on \\\"ERAS-like\\\" protocols or only limited number of ERAS measures. This study aims at analyzing all randomized studies applying ERAS-like protocols in cardiac surgery for perioperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS-like with standard protocols of perioperative care was performed (PROSPERO registration CRD42021283765). PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting and assessing data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen single center RCTs (N = 1704, 850 in ERAS-like protocol and 854 in the standard care group) were selected. The most common procedures were surgical revascularization (66.3%) and valvular surgery (24.9%). No difference was found in the incidence of inhospital mortality between the ERAS and standard treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0.61 [0.31; 1.20], p = 0.15). ERAS was associated with reduced intensive care unit (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.57, p < 0.01) and hospital stay (SMD -0.23, p < 0.01) and reduced rates of overall complications when compared to the standard protocol (RR 0.60, p < 0.01) driven by the reduction in stroke (RR 0.29 [0.13; 0.62], p < 0.01). A significant heterogeneity in terms of the elements of the ERAS protocol included in the studies was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ERAS-like protocols have no impact on short-term survival after cardiac surgery but allows for a faster hospital discharge while potentially reducing surgical complications. However, this study highlights a significant nonadherence and heterogeneity to the entirety of ERAS protocols warranting further RCTs in this field including a greater number of elements of the framework.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23926,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"779-790\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12122\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12122","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:以往结合心脏手术随机和观察证据进行的荟萃分析表明,术后恢复强化方案(ERAS)对术后效果有积极影响。然而,目前还没有基于随机研究的确切数据,而且最近在指南和共识声明中系统化的ERAS措施和路径的全部内容也未在已发表的研究中体现。现有文献实际上只关注 "ERAS-like "方案或数量有限的ERAS措施。本研究旨在分析所有在心脏手术中应用 ERAS 类似方案的围手术期结果的随机研究:方法:对ERAS类方案与标准围手术期护理方案进行比较的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了荟萃分析(PROSPERO注册号CRD42021283765)。采用PRISMA指南对数据进行摘要和评估:结果:共选取了 13 项单中心 RCT(N = 1704,ERAS 类方案组 850 项,标准护理组 854 项)。最常见的手术是血管重建手术(66.3%)和瓣膜手术(24.9%)。ERAS组和标准治疗组的院内死亡率没有差异(风险比 [RR] 0.61 [0.31; 1.20],P = 0.15)。ERAS与重症监护病房减少有关(标准化平均差[SMD] -0.57,p 结论:ERAS与标准治疗组的住院死亡率没有影响:ERAS类似方案对心脏手术后的短期存活率没有影响,但能让患者更快出院,同时有可能减少手术并发症。然而,本研究强调了ERAS方案的严重不依从性和整个方案的异质性,因此需要在该领域开展更多的RCT研究,包括框架中更多的元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhanced recovery protocols after surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials in cardiac surgery.

Background: Previous meta-analyses combining randomized and observational evidence in cardiac surgery have shown positive impact of enhanced recovery protocols after surgery (ERAS) on postoperative outcomes. However, definitive data based on randomized studies are missing, and the entirety of the ERAS measures and pathway, as recently systematized in guidelines and consensus statements, have not been captured in the published studies. The available literature actually focuses on "ERAS-like" protocols or only limited number of ERAS measures. This study aims at analyzing all randomized studies applying ERAS-like protocols in cardiac surgery for perioperative outcomes.

Methods: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS-like with standard protocols of perioperative care was performed (PROSPERO registration CRD42021283765). PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting and assessing data.

Results: Thirteen single center RCTs (N = 1704, 850 in ERAS-like protocol and 854 in the standard care group) were selected. The most common procedures were surgical revascularization (66.3%) and valvular surgery (24.9%). No difference was found in the incidence of inhospital mortality between the ERAS and standard treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0.61 [0.31; 1.20], p = 0.15). ERAS was associated with reduced intensive care unit (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.57, p < 0.01) and hospital stay (SMD -0.23, p < 0.01) and reduced rates of overall complications when compared to the standard protocol (RR 0.60, p < 0.01) driven by the reduction in stroke (RR 0.29 [0.13; 0.62], p < 0.01). A significant heterogeneity in terms of the elements of the ERAS protocol included in the studies was observed.

Conclusions: ERAS-like protocols have no impact on short-term survival after cardiac surgery but allows for a faster hospital discharge while potentially reducing surgical complications. However, this study highlights a significant nonadherence and heterogeneity to the entirety of ERAS protocols warranting further RCTs in this field including a greater number of elements of the framework.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Surgery
World Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
460
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgery is the official publication of the International Society of Surgery/Societe Internationale de Chirurgie (iss-sic.com). Under the editorship of Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, World Journal of Surgery provides an in-depth, international forum for the most authoritative information on major clinical problems in the fields of clinical and experimental surgery, surgical education, and socioeconomic aspects of surgical care. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished surgeons from across the world who make up the Editorial Board.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信