Mac Curtain Benjamin M, O'Mahony Aaron, Temperley Hugo C, Ng Zi Qin
Department of Surgery, St. John of God Subiaco Hospital, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia.
Department of General Surgery, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
ANZ J Surg. 2023 Jul-Aug;93(7-8):1780-1786. doi: 10.1111/ans.18550. Epub 2023 Jun 6.
This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to assess the modified protocols used and patient outcomes when enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are utilized in an emergency setting.
PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials were comprehensively searched until 13 March 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess for bias, along with funnel plot asymmetry. We present log risk ratios for dichotomous variables and raw mean differences for continuous variables.
Seven randomized trials were included, comprising 573 patients. Results of the primary outcomes when comparing ERAS to standard care are as follows; withdrawal of nasogastric tube (raw mean difference -1.87 CI: -2.386 to -1.359), time to first liquid diet (raw mean difference -2.56 CI: -3.435 to -1.669), time to first solid diet (raw mean difference -2.35 CI: -2.933 to -1.76), time to first flatus (raw mean difference -2.73 CI: -5.726 to 0.257), time to first stool passed (raw mean difference -1.83 CI: -2.307 to -1.349), time to removal of drains (raw mean difference -3.23 CI: -3.609 to -2.852), time to removal of urinary catheter (raw mean difference -1.57 CI: -3.472 to 0.334), mean pain score (raw mean difference -1.79 CI: -2.222 to -1.351) and length of hospital stay (raw mean difference -3.16 CI: -3.688 to -2.63).
The adoption of ERAS protocols in an emergency surgery setting was observed to enhance patient recovery, while not indicating any statistically significant increase in adverse outcomes.
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在评估在急诊环境中采用加速康复外科(ERAS)方案时所使用的改良方案及患者预后。
全面检索了截至2023年3月13日的PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库。使用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具评估偏倚,并结合漏斗图不对称性进行分析。我们给出了二分变量的对数风险比和连续变量的原始均值差。
纳入了7项随机试验,共573例患者。将ERAS与标准护理进行比较时,主要结局的结果如下:鼻胃管拔除(原始均值差-1.87,可信区间:-2.386至-1.359)、首次流食时间(原始均值差-2.56,可信区间:-3.435至-1.669)、首次固体食物摄入时间(原始均值差-2.35,可信区间:-2.933至-1.76)、首次排气时间(原始均值差-2.73,可信区间:-5.726至0.257)、首次排便时间(原始均值差-1.83,可信区间:-2.307至-1.349)引流管拔除时间(原始均值差-3.23,可信区间:-3.609至-2.852)、导尿管拔除时间(原始均值差-1.57,可信区间:-3.472至0.334)、平均疼痛评分(原始均值差-1.79,可信区间:-2.222至-1.351)和住院时间(原始均值差-3.16,可信区间:-3.688至-2.63)。
观察到在急诊手术环境中采用ERAS方案可促进患者康复,同时未显示不良结局有任何统计学上的显著增加。