AB212. SOH25_AB_234. The impact of divergent enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols on perioperative outcomes following minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomies
General Posters II

AB212. SOH25_AB_234. The impact of divergent enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols on perioperative outcomes following minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomies

Abhi Narsiman1, Domhnall O’Connor2, Mayilone Arumugasamy2, William Robb2, Jarlath Bolger2

1Department of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland (RCSI), Dublin, Ireland; 2Department of Upper GI and General Surgery, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are designed to improve patient outcomes through optimised perioperative care. In minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), a variety of ERAS strategies are employed, but their comparative impact on perioperative outcomes remains uncertain. This systematic review examines the effects of differing ERAS protocols on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing MIE and RAMIE.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, Scopus, and CINAHL using keywords such as “Enhanced Recovery After Surgery or ERAS”, “minimally invasive (o)esophagectomy or MIO or MIE”, and “robotic-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy or RAMIO or RAMIE”. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and peer-reviewed retrospective and prospective cohort studies were included. Eligible studies were assessed for specific ERAS components and their impact on outcomes such as postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOHS), and recovery times.

Results: A total of 11 studies were included, displaying significant divergence in ERAS protocols. Variability was seen in the timing of enteral nutrition, postoperative mobilization, and pain management. ERAS protocols incorporating early feeding, no nasogastric tube, and structured early mobilization generally reported fewer complications, namely cardiopulmonary complications, shorter LOHS—apart from Liu and Tang’s ERAS protocols—and better overall pain control.

Conclusions: Divergent ERAS strategies in MIE and RAMIE impact perioperative outcomes to varying degrees. Differences in protocol implementation and outcome reporting emphasise the need for more standardised ERAS strategies to guide research in determining the most effective components for optimising patient recovery while also minimising complications.

Keywords: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS); esophagectomy; minimally invasive techniques; perioperative outcomes; optimisation of care

Acknowledgments

None.

Footnote

Funding: None.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

doi: 10.21037/map-25-ab212
Cite this abstract as: Narsiman A, O’Connor D, Arumugasamy M, Robb W, Bolger J. AB212. SOH25_AB_234. The impact of divergent enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols on perioperative outcomes following minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomies. Mesentery Peritoneum 2025;9:AB212.

Article Options

Download Citation

Share