Open AccessImpact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol versus standard of care on postoperative Acute Kidney Injury (AKI): A meta-analysis
Author(s) -
Whenzhen Shen,
Zehao Wu,
Yunlu Wang,
Yi Sun,
Anshi Wu
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0251476
Subject(s) - medicine , acute kidney injury , incidence (geometry) , confidence interval , meta analysis , relative risk , cochrane library , regimen , cohort study , physics , optics
Background Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common postoperative complication with an incidence of nearly 15%. Relatively balanced fluid management, flexible use of vasoactive drugs, multimodal analgesia containing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are fundamental to ERAS protocols. However, these basic tenants may lead to an increased incidence of postoperative AKI. Methods A search was done in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and reference lists to identify relevant studies from inception until May 2020 to be included in this study. Effects were summarized using pooled risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cls) with random effect model. Heterogeneity assessment, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were performed. Results A systematic review of nineteen cohort studies covering 17,205 patients, comparing impact of ERAS with conventional care on postoperative AKI was performed. Notably, the ERAS regimen did not increase the incidence of postoperative AKI compared with standard care (RR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.52; I 2 = 53%). Both goal-directed fluid therapy (RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.99–1.61; I 2 = 55%) and restrictive fluid management (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.57–1.98; I 2 = 60%) had no significant effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. There was no significant statistical difference between different AKI diagnostic criteria (P = 0.43; I 2 = 0%). ERAS group had significantly shorter hospital stay (MD: −1.54; 95% CI: −1.91 to −1.17; I 2 = 66%). There was no statistical difference in 30-day readmission rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.20; I 2 = 42%), 30-day reoperation rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.34; I 2 = 42%) and mortality (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.11; I 2 = 0%) between the two groups. Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests that ERAS protocols do not increase readmission or reoperation rates and mortality while significantly reducing LOS. Most importantly, the ERAS protocol was shown to have no promoting effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. Even GDFT and restrictive fluid management cannot avoid the occurrence of postoperative AKI, and the ERAS protocol is still worth recommending and its safety is further confirmed.