Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) in Individuals with Diabetes: A Systematic Review.

Related Articles

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) in Individuals with Diabetes: A Systematic Review.

World J Surg. 2017 Mar 20;:

Authors: Albalawi Z, Laffin M, Gramlich L, Senior P, McAlister FA

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prevalence of diabetes in surgical patients is 10-40%. It is well recognized that they have higher rates of complications, and longer stays in hospital compared to patients without diabetes. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based multimodal surgical care pathway that improves postoperative complications and length of stay in patients without diabetes. This review evaluates the evidence on whether individuals with diabetes would benefit from ERAS implementation.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE searched with no language restrictions applied. Conference proceedings and bibliographies were reviewed. Experts in the field were contacted, and http://ift.tt/PmpYKN searched for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) looking at individuals with diabetes undergoing surgery randomized to ERAS(®) or conventional care. Non-randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and cohort studies with concurrent controls were also considered. Two authors independently screened studies.
RESULTS: The electronic search yielded 437 references. After removing duplicates, 376 were screened for eligibility. Conference proceedings and bibliographies identified additional references. Searching http://ift.tt/PmpYKN yielded 59 references. Contacting experts in the field identified no further studies. Fourteen full articles were assessed and subsequently excluded for the following reasons: used an intervention other than ERAS(®), did not include patients with diabetes, or used an uncontrolled observational design.
CONCLUSIONS: To date, the effects of ERAS(®) on patients with diabetes have not been rigorously evaluated. This review highlights the lack of evidence in this area and provides guidance on design for future studies.

PMID: 28321553 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

from Head and Neck on PubMed via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2o8dRor


http://ift.tt/2nVjlDQ