Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Craniotomies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract

The efficacy of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in neurosurgery has not yet been established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the effects of ERAS protocols and conventional perioperative care on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing craniotomy. The primary outcome was postoperative length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain visual analog pain scores, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative complications, all-cause reoperation, readmission after discharge, and mortality. A literature search up to August 10, 2023, was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Five studies, including 871 patients, were identified for inclusion in this review. Compared with conventional perioperative care, ERAS protocols reduced the length of postoperative hospital stay (difference of medians, −1.52 days; 95% CI: −2.55 to −0.49); there was high heterogeneity across studies (I 2, 74%). ERAS protocols were also associated with a lower risk of PONV (relative risk, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69-0.90; I 2, 99%) and postoperative pain with a visual analog scale score ≥4 at postoperative day 1 (relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.28-0.49; I 2, 14%). Other outcomes, including postoperative complications, did not differ between ERAS and conventional care groups. ERAS protocols may be superior to conventional perioperative care in craniotomy patients in terms of lower length of hospital stay, lower incidence of PONV, and improved postoperative pain scores. Further randomized trials are required to identify the impact of ERAS protocols on the quality of recovery after craniotomy.