Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in hip and knee replacement surgery: description of a multidisciplinary program to improve management of the patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Frassanito ◽  
A. Vergari ◽  
R. Nestorini ◽  
G. Cerulli ◽  
G. Placella ◽  
...  
Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 500-500
Author(s):  
Alexander G.G. Turpie ◽  
André Schmidt ◽  
Michael Rud Lassen ◽  
Lorenzo Mantovani ◽  
Reinhold Kreutz ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 500 Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis after Total Hip or Knee Replacement Surgery: Comparison of Outcomes of the XAMOS and RECORD Studies. Patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery are at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Rivaroxaban has been approved for clinical use in this indication based on the extensive phase III RECORD program, which investigated the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban regimens compared with subcutaneous enoxaparin regimens in patients undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement surgery. XAMOS is a phase IV, non-interventional, open-label cohort study that compared rivaroxaban with any pharmacological prophylaxis used in routine clinical practice for VTE prevention after major orthopedic surgery of the hip or knee. An additional aim of the XAMOS study was to assess whether the results from the phase III RECORD studies would be reflected in routine clinical practice. The XAMOS study, which ran from 2009 to 2011, collected data on the incidence of adverse events (including symptomatic thromboembolic and bleeding events) in adult patients from 252 centers in 37 countries worldwide, who underwent elective hip or knee replacement surgery (or hip fracture surgery, where appropriate) and received rivaroxaban or other pharmacological prophylaxis (standard of care). The attending physician determined the type, duration, and dose of drug. Of the 17,701 patients enrolled, 8778 received rivaroxaban and 8635 received standard of care, of whom 7055 (81.7%) received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Primary hip/knee replacement surgery accounted for >90% of all procedures. Baseline demographics (e.g. age, sex, body weight, and ethnicity) were similar for patients receiving rivaroxaban, standard of care, or LMWH, and were also similar to those of patients who received rivaroxaban in the RECORD program. LMWH was the comparator in the RECORD program; therefore, the XAMOS study also compared outcomes with LMWH and rivaroxaban. Data for the LMWH group were similar to the standard-of-care group. Rates of symptomatic arterial, venous, and all thromboembolic events in XAMOS were lower in the rivaroxaban group compared with the LMWH group (Figure 1). The data are consistent with the results of the RECORD1–4 pooled analysis, which showed a significantly lower incidence of symptomatic VTE and all-cause mortality in patients receiving rivaroxaban compared with those receiving enoxaparin (Figure 2). The rates of treatment-emergent major bleeding events (RECORD definition) were 0.4% vs 0.3% in the rivaroxaban and LMWH groups, respectively (odds ratio [OR]=1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75–2.18; Figures 1 and 2), and were similar to those in the RECORD1–4 pooled analysis (day 12±2 active treatment pool: 0.3% [rivaroxaban] vs 0.2% [enoxaparin]; OR=1.62; 95% CI 0.77–3.53; Figure 2). When the European Medicines Agency (EMA) definition for treatment-emergent major bleeding was used, the incidence of major bleeding was slightly higher (nonsignificant) for patients receiving rivaroxaban compared with those receiving LMWH in the XAMOS study (1.7% vs 1.4%; OR=1.19; 95% CI: 0.92–1.53; Figures 1 and 2); these results were also similar to those of the RECORD1–4 pooled analysis (day 12±2 active treatment pool: 2.0% [rivaroxaban] vs 1.7% [enoxaparin]; OR=1.20; 95% CI: 0.91–1.57). XAMOS is the first study presenting real-world experience of the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban for the prevention of VTE after major orthopedic surgery of the hip or knee. The results of XAMOS showed that rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly lower incidence of symptomatic VTE compared with LMWH, without a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding. These findings are consistent with those obtained in the RECORD studies, and indicate that the results of the RECORD program can be translated into the routine clinical setting. Disclosures: Turpie: GSK: Speakers Bureau; GSK, JnJ: Consultancy. Schmidt:Bayer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lassen:Bayer: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb; GlaxoSmithKline; Bayer; Boehringer: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Research Funding. Mantovani:Bayer Healthcare Pfizer Merck Serono Baxter Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Bayer Healthcare Pfizer Bristol-Meyer Squibb Amgen Merck&Co: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare Pfizer Bristol-Meyer Squibb Biogen Idec Medtronic Admirall Otsuka Amgen Merck&Co Merck-Serono: Research Funding. Kreutz:Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayerm Daichii Sankyo, Berlin-Chemie Menarini: Speakers Bureau; Bayer, Daichii Sankyo: financial and material support, financial and material support Other. Holberg:Bayer Healthcare: Employment. Haas:Sanofi Aventis: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy.


2003 ◽  
Vol 37 (11) ◽  
pp. 1632-1643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison H Tran ◽  
Garvin Lee

OBJECTIVE: To review clinical information related to fondaparinux, a synthetic pentasaccharide recently approved for the prevention of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgeries and for extended DVT prophylaxis after hip fracture surgery. DATA SOURCES: Primary and review articles were identified by MEDLINE (1983–June 2003) using the key words pentasaccharide, Org31540, SR90107A, DVT prophylaxis, and fondaparinux. Additional sources were found listed in articles, abstracts, and unpublished data on file from the manufacturer. Articles selected were based on their coverage of the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of fondaparinux. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All of the articles identified were evaluated and all information deemed relevant was included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fondaparinux is a selective antithrombin-dependent, indirect inhibitor of activated factor Xa. It has a favorable and predictable pharmacokinetic profile when administered subcutaneously, and has a long half-life, allowing once-daily dosing. Fondaparinux lacks in vitro cross-reactivity with heparin-induced antibodies. Major Phase III studies have demonstrated that subcutaneous fondaparinux sodium 2.5 mg given at least 6 hours postoperatively resulted in a 55% reduction in the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, total hip replacement surgery, or knee replacement surgery compared with standard enoxaparin therapy. It has a safety profile similar to that of enoxaparin with respect to clinically relevant major bleeding, including fatal bleeding, nonfatal bleeding, and bleeding requiring repeat surgery. The use of fondaparinux for prolonged prophylaxis after hip fracture has demonstrated further reduction in VTE events without increasing the risk of bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Fondaparinux is the first of a new class of synthetic factor Xa inhibitors that demonstrated greater efficacy compared with enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE in major orthopedic surgery without an increase in clinically relevant bleeding. Given the favorable cost-effectiveness analysis and improved efficacy profile, fondaparinux should be considered for formulary addition for DVT prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip and knee replacement surgery. In patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, fondaparinux should be considered the DVT prophylaxis of choice. Extended thromboprophylaxis up to 28 days resulted in additional reduction in VTE (both symptomatic and venography-proven DVT) in patients with hip fracture surgery.


2003 ◽  
Vol 90 (11) ◽  
pp. 949-954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronny Michler ◽  
Martin Klein ◽  
Grit Faulmann ◽  
Christian Weber ◽  
Sebastian Schellong ◽  
...  

SummaryUltrasound screening for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) after orthopedic surgery revealed thrombosis in up to 30% of patients, but the clinical impact of screening for distal thrombosis has not been established.Three hundred and forty six patients after hip or knee replacement and postoperative standard prophylaxis of 10 days low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) were randomized to receive either prolonged prophylaxis with LMWH or postoperative ultrasound screening for proximal and distal thrombosis. All thrombosis found in screening was treated. Patients with a negative screening test did not receive any heparin after day 10. The cumulative rate of proximal thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism until day 35 postoperatively was determined.In 174 screening patients, ultrasound found 55 cases of distal (31.6%) and 9 cases of proximal (5.1%) in-hospital thrombosis. In 108 screening patients without thrombosis at discharge 7 new distal (6.5%) and 6 new proximal (5.6%) thrombotic events occurred by day 35. In 163 patients with prolonged prophylaxis, 33 cases of distal (20.2%) and 7 cases of proximal (4,3%) thrombotic events occurred by day 35. The cumulative rate of proximal events was 8,7% in the screening group and 4.3% in the prophylaxis group (p=0.12).In conclusion, ultrasound screening for thrombosis does not reduce the rate of proximal thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism 35 days after hip or knee replacement surgery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-188
Author(s):  
Andrew Judge ◽  
Andrew Carr ◽  
Andrew Price ◽  
Cesar Garriga ◽  
Cyrus Cooper ◽  
...  

Background There is limited evidence concerning the effectiveness of enhanced recovery programmes in hip and knee replacement surgery, particularly when applied nationwide across a health-care system. Objectives To determine the effect of hospital organisation, surgical factors and the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway on patient outcomes and NHS costs of hip and knee replacement. Design (1) Statistical analysis of national linked data to explore geographical variations in patient outcomes of surgery. (2) A natural experimental study to determine clinical effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery. (3) A qualitative study to identify barriers to, and facilitators of, change. (4) Health economics analysis to establish NHS costs and cost-effectiveness. Setting Data from the National Joint Registry, linked to English Hospital Episode Statistics and patient-reported outcome measures in both the geographical variation and natural experiment studies, together with the economic evaluation. The ethnographic study took place in four hospitals in a region of England. Participants Qualitative study – 38 health professionals working in hip and knee replacement services in secondary care and 37 patients receiving hip or knee replacement. Interventions Natural experiment – implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery at each hospital between 2009 and 2011. Enhanced recovery after surgery is a complex intervention focusing on several areas of patients’ care pathways through surgery: preoperatively (patient is in best possible condition for surgery), perioperatively (patient has best possible management during and after operation) and postoperatively (patient experiences best rehabilitation). Main outcome measures Patient-reported pain and function (Oxford Hip Score/Oxford Knee Score); 6-month complications; length of stay; bed-day costs; and revision surgery within 5 years. Results Geographical study – there are potentially unwarranted variations in patient outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery. This variation cannot be explained by differences in patients, case mix, surgical or hospital organisational factors. Qualitative – successful implementation depends on empowering patients to work towards their recovery, providing post-discharge support and promoting successful multidisciplinary team working. Care processes were negotiated between patients and health-care professionals. ‘Good care’ remains an aspiration, particularly in the post-discharge period. Natural experiment – length of stay has declined substantially, pain and function have improved, revision rates are in decline and complication rates remain stable. The introduction of a national enhanced recovery after surgery programme maintained improvement, but did not alter the rate of change already under way. Health economics – costs are high in the year of joint replacement and remain higher in the subsequent year after surgery. There is a strong economic incentive to identify ways of reducing revisions and complications following joint replacement. Published cost-effectiveness evidence supports enhanced recovery pathways as a whole. Limitations Short duration of follow-up data prior to enhanced recovery after surgery implementation and missing data, particularly for hospital organisation factors. Conclusion No evidence was found to show that enhanced recovery after surgery had a substantial impact on longer-term downwards trends in costs and length of stay. Trends of improving outcomes were seen across all age groups, in those with and without comorbidity, and had begun prior to the formal enhanced recovery after surgery roll-out. Reductions in length of stay have been achieved without adversely affecting patient outcomes, yet, substantial variation remains in outcomes between hospital trusts. Future work There is still work to be done to reduce and understand unwarranted variations in outcome between individual hospitals. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017059473. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. e35
Author(s):  
Bruna Manuel Gonçalves ◽  
Ana Margarida Silva Santos ◽  
Carolina Santos ◽  
Sénio Vaz ◽  
Carla Pinto

The Physician ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32
Author(s):  
Jaydeep Shah ◽  
Keshav Singhal

Background: The concept of a fast track (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery, ERAS) was introduced to colorectal surgery in Denmark by Kehlet in 1999 which improved the quality of the care and reduced the length of hospital stay following major colorectal surgery. The same principles of ERAS have been applied to the orthopaedic surgery particularly the hip and knee replacement surgery and fracture neck of femur surgery. It is a relatively new approach in orthopaedics to the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative care of the patients undergoing surgery.   Methods: We have compared the length of inpatient stay, day of mobilisation, postoperative blood transfusion and adverse outcome for the patients undergoing hip or knee replacement by a single surgeon (KS) between ERAS and NON ERAS patients.   Results: A total of 138 patients underwent hip or knee replacement, hip resurfacing arthroplasty or oxford unicompartmental arthroplasty between July 2011 and June 2012 with ERAS protocol. In the Non-ERAS group, 140 patients underwent hip or knee arthroplasty, resurfacing or oxford uni-compartmental knee replacement in the previous year (July 2010 to June 2011) by the same surgeon. Average hospital inpatient stays for the ERAS patients was 4.12 days with 73.10% of the patients having an inpatient hospital stay of less than or equal to 5 days. The average hospital inpatient stays for the NON-ERAS patients was 8.34 days with only 24.08% of the patients being discharged in less than or equal to 5 days.   Conclusions: Our study shows that the implementation of the ERAS protocol in hip and knee replacement surgery is associated with improved patient experience, faster recovery and shorter hospital inpatient stay with no increase in complication.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document