Is ERAS Protocol Necessary during Ileostomy Reversal in Patients after Anterior Rectal Resection—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Le résumé fourni par la source

Purpose: The aim of this study is to establish whether implement ation of the ERAS protocol has a beneficial effect postoperatively after ileostomy reversal. Introduction: Loop ileostomy is commonly performed during anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision to protect the newly created anastomosis. Ileostomy reversal is performed after rectal anastomoses are completely healed and can be associated with complications. The use of the ERAS protocol in elective colorectal surgery has been shown to significantly reduce the complication rate and length of hospital stay without an increased readmission rate. Methods: After PROSPERO registration (CRD42023449551), a systematic review of the following databases was carried out: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. This meta-analysis involved studies up to December 2023 without language restrictions. A random effects model meta-analysis was performed to assess complications, readmissions, and length of stay (LOS) in ileostomy reversal patients with and without ERAS protocol implementation. Results: Six articles were analyzed, and each study reported on the elements of the ERAS protocol. There was no significant difference between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups in terms of complications rate (OR = 0.98; 95%CI: 0.64–1.52; I2 = 0%). Postoperative ileus was the most prevalent adverse event in both groups. The readmission rate did not differ significantly between the groups (OR = 1.77; 95%CI: 0.85–3.50, I2 = 0%). In comparison to the control group, the LOS in the ERAS group was noticeably shorter (MD = −1.94; 95%CI: −3.38–−0.49; I2 = 77%). Conclusions: Following the ERAS protocol can result in a shorter LOS and does not increase complications or readmission rates in patients undergoing ileostomy reversal. Thus, the ERAS protocol is recommended for clinical implementation.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.