Application of Enhanced Recovery after Surgical Treatment of the Occipitocervical Region

OBJECTIVE: The concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been proposed to provide guidance for the improved postoperative rehabilitation of patients with occipitocervical region disease (ORD). METHODS: This study retrospectively investigated 208 consecutive patients (116 men and 92 women) ranging in age from 22 to 76 years with ORD between July 2014 and June 2017 in our medical center, who were divided into three groups that received different preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative management plans: traditional group (n = 73), ameliorated group (n = 70), and ERAS group (n = 65). We compiled a range of data relating to demographics and postoperative changes in hemoglobin and albumin, surgery duration, intraoperative blood loss, number of postoperative hospitalization days and expenses, readmission rates, and visual analog scale pain symptoms. Data were statistically evaluated using one‐way analysis of variance with Student–Newman–Keuls‐q post hoc tests or chi‐square tests. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in terms of age (P = 0.235), gender (P = 0.691), body mass index (P = 0.723), American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (0.747), lesion character (P = 0.337) and lesion site (P = 0.957) between the three groups. Within a 6 months follow‐up period, there was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of surgery duration (P = 0.225), blood loss (P = 0.172), changes in hemoglobin (P = 0.255) and albumin (P = 0.178). However, postoperative hospitalization days (P = 0.000), postoperative costs (P = 0.019) and improvement of pain symptoms (P = 0.000) in ERAS group were significantly lower or higher than those in traditional group or ameliorated group, respectively. There were 29 (39.73%), 22 (31.43%), and 13 (20.00%), recorded cases of postoperative complications in traditional group, ameliorated group and ERAS group, respectively; complications in ERAS group were significantly lower than those in other two groups (P = 0.043). Moreover, all of the complications were mitigated effectively by the infusion of fluid, analgesia, treatment of infections, or antiemetic medications. There were 2 (2.74%), 3 (4.29%) and 2 (3.08%), recorded cases of re‐admission in traditional group, ameliorated group and ERAS group, respectively, but there were no statistically significant differences when compared across the three groups (P = 0.866). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS can provide benefits when it applied to patients undergoing ORD surgery mainly in terms of reducing postoperative complications, however, ERAS does not increase the economic burden of patients or decrease the risk of readmission.