Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Role of regional anesthesia and analgesia in enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewpeer-review

DOI

  1. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction: time for enhanced recovery after surgery programmes

    Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialpeer-review

  2. Early and late readmissions after enhanced recovery thoracoscopic lobectomy

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

  • Kariem El-Boghdadly
  • James M Jack
  • Aine Heaney
  • Nick D Black
  • Marina F Englesakis
  • Henrik Kehlet
  • Vincent W S Chan
View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia is an important element of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), but the clinical impact of regional anesthesia and analgesia for colorectal surgery remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the impact of regional anesthesia following colorectal surgery in the setting of ERAS.

EVIDENCE REVIEW: We performed a systematic review of nine databases up to June 2020, seeking randomized controlled trials comparing regional anesthesia versus control in an ERAS pathway for colorectal surgery. We analyzed the studies with successful ERAS implementation, defined as ERAS protocols with a hospital length of stay of ≤5 days. Data were qualitatively synthesized. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.

FINDINGS: Of the 29 studies reporting ERAS pathways, only 13 comprising 1170 patients were included, with modest methodological quality and poor reporting of adherence to ERAS pathways. Epidural analgesia had limited evidence of outcome benefits in open surgery, while spinal analgesia with intrathecal opioids may potentially be associated with improved outcomes with no impact on length of stay in laparoscopic surgery, though dosing must be further investigated. There was limited evidence for fascial plane blocks or other regional anesthetic techniques.

CONCLUSIONS: Although there was variable methodological quality and reporting of ERAS, we found little evidence demonstrating the clinical benefits of regional anesthetic techniques in the setting of successful ERAS implementation, and future studies must report adherence to ERAS in order for their interventions to be generalizable to modern clinical practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020161200.

Original languageEnglish
JournalRegional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
Volume47
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)282-292
Number of pages11
ISSN1098-7339
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2022

Bibliographical note

© American Society of Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

    Research areas

  • outcomes, regional anesthesia, pain management

ID: 75650909