Diz-Ferreira Eva, Díaz-Vidal Pablo, Fernández-Vázquez Uxía, Gil-Casado Cristina, Luna-Rojas Pedro, Diz José Carlos
Well-Move Research Group, University of Vigo, School of Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
School of Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2025 May;39(5):1325-1334. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2025.01.036. Epub 2025 Jan 30.
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs emerged as a strategy to reduce perioperative morbidity; however, there is currently limited evidence of their clinical efficacy. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of ERAS programs in cardiac surgery on hospital length of stay, mortality, atrial fibrillation, and quality of life.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, encompassing studies on ERAS programs in adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. The effect size and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated with a random-effects model. The protocol was preregistered on Open Science Framework.
Eighteen studies (published between 2016 and 2023) comprising 4,469 patients were included in the analysis, of which only one was a randomized controlled trial. The implementation of ERAS was associated with a reduction in hospital stay of 1.24 days (95% CI: -1.67, -0.82, p < 0.001, I = 83%). No differences were observed between the groups in mortality (odds ratio: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.28, 1.48, p = 0.3, I = 0%), nor in the incidence of atrial fibrillation (odds ratio: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.57, 1.03, p = 0.08, I = 17%). A meta-analysis of quality of life was not feasible due to a lack of sufficient data.
Although ERAS programs were associated with a reduction in hospital stay and no differences in mortality or atrial fibrillation, the quality of the evidence was very low. To recommend the implementation of ERAS programs in cardiac surgery, it is necessary to have randomized studies providing evidence of its efficacy, and studies including quality of life and other patient-centered recovery criteria outcomes.
术后加速康复(ERAS)方案作为一种降低围手术期发病率的策略应运而生;然而,目前关于其临床疗效的证据有限。本研究的目的是评估心脏手术中ERAS方案对住院时间、死亡率、房颤及生活质量的影响。
按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目声明进行系统评价和Meta分析,纳入关于接受择期心脏手术的成年患者的ERAS方案的研究。采用随机效应模型估计效应量和95%置信区间(CI)。该方案已在开放科学框架上预先注册。
分析纳入了18项研究(发表于2016年至2023年),共4469例患者,其中只有1项是随机对照试验。ERAS方案的实施与住院时间缩短1.24天相关(95%CI:-1.67,-0.82,p<0.001,I²=83%)。两组在死亡率(优势比:0.65,95%CI:0.28,1.48,p=0.3,I²=0%)和房颤发生率(优势比:0.77,95%CI:0.57,1.03,p=0.08,I²=17%)方面未观察到差异。由于缺乏足够的数据,无法对生活质量进行Meta分析。
尽管ERAS方案与住院时间缩短相关,且在死亡率或房颤方面无差异,但证据质量非常低。要推荐在心脏手术中实施ERAS方案,有必要进行随机研究以提供其疗效的证据,以及纳入生活质量和其他以患者为中心的康复标准结局的研究。