Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Recommendations for Esophagectomy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery

Abstract

Esophagectomy for malignant and benign disease has historically been associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality—a distinguishing feature of this complex surgery. The increasing adoption of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs within esophageal surgery provides a framework within which standardized care can be delivered to patients with the intention of ensuring predictable high-quality outcomes. Presented herein is a summary of current evidence and recommendations for standardized perioperative care in esophagectomy. Recommendations are divided between preoperative, operative, and postoperative periods and address central issues concerning patient prehabilitation nutrition in addition to technical aspects of surgical and anesthetic management. The central role of the multidisciplinary team in setting appropriate goals and delivering a coordinate high standard of care is strongly emphasized.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE. Enhanced recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2015;28(5):468–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Munasinghe A, Markar SR, Mamidanna R, Darzi AW, Faiz OD, Hanna GB, et al. Is it time to centralize high-risk cancer care in the United States? Comparison of outcomes of esophagectomy between England and the United States. Ann Surg. 2015;262(1):79–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Low DE, Allum W, De Manzoni G, Ferri L, Immanuel A, Kuppusamy M, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in esophagectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations. World J Surg. 2019;43:299–330.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Taylor C, Munro AJ, Glynne-Jones R, Griffith C, Trevatt P, Richards M, et al. Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: what is the evidence? BMJ. 2010;340:c951.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Davies AR, Deans DA, Penman I, Plevris JN, Fletcher J, Wall L, et al. The multidisciplinary team meeting improves staging accuracy and treatment selection for gastro-esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2006;19(6):496–503.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Stephens MR, Lewis WG, Brewster AE, Lord I, Blackshaw GR, Hodzovic I, et al. Multidisciplinary team management is associated with improved outcomes after surgery for esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2006;19(3):164–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmidt HM, Roberts JM, Bodnar AM, Kunz S, Kirtland SH, Koehler RP, et al. Thoracic multidisciplinary tumor board routinely impacts therapeutic plans in patients with lung and esophageal cancer: a prospective cohort study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99(5):1719–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fried LP, Ferrucci L, Darer J, Williamson JD, Anderson G. Untangling the concepts of disability, frailty, and comorbidity: implications for improved targeting and care. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004;59(3):255–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, Bergman H, Hogan DB, McDowell I, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173(5):489–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Gani F, Buettner S, Margonis GA, Sasaki K, Wagner D, Kim Y, et al. Sarcopenia predicts costs among patients undergoing major abdominal operations. Surgery. 2016;160(5):1162–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lu J, Zheng HL, Li P, Xie JW, Wang JB, Lin JX, et al. High preoperative modified frailty index has a negative impact on short- and long-term outcomes of octogenarians with gastric cancer after laparoscopic gastrectomy. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(5):2193–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McIsaac DI, Bryson GL, van Walraven C. Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(6):538–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mosquera C, Spaniolas K, Fitzgerald TL. Impact of frailty on surgical outcomes: the right patient for the right procedure. Surgery. 2016;160(2):272–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Santa Mina D, Hilton WJ, Matthew AG, Awasthi R, Bousquet-Dion G, Alibhai SMH, et al. Prehabilitation for radical prostatectomy: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Surg Oncol. 2018;27(2):289–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Minnella EM, Bousquet-Dion G, Awasthi R, Scheede-Bergdahl C, Carli F. Multimodal prehabilitation improves functional capacity before and after colorectal surgery for cancer: a five-year research experience. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(2):295–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gillis C, Li C, Lee L, Awasthi R, Augustin B, Gamsa A, et al. Prehabilitation versus rehabilitation: a randomized control trial in patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer. Anesthesiology. 2014;121(5):937–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carli F, Charlebois P, Stein B, Feldman L, Zavorsky G, Kim DJ, et al. Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2010;97(8):1187–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dunne DF, Jack S, Jones RP, Jones L, Lythgoe DT, Malik HZ, et al. Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation before planned liver resection. Br J Surg. 2016;103(5):504–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gillis C, Buhler K, Bresee L, Carli F, Gramlich L, Culos-Reed N, et al. Effects of nutritional Prehabilitation, with and without exercise, on outcomes of patients who undergo colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2018;155:391–410.e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sun L, Quan XQ, Yu S. An epidemiological survey of cachexia in advanced cancer patients and analysis on its diagnostic and treatment status. Nutr Cancer. 2015;67(7):1056–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Anandavadivelan P, Lagergren P. Cachexia in patients with oesophageal cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;13(3):185–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Boshier PR, Heneghan R, Markar SR, Baracos VE, Low DE. Assessment of body composition and sarcopenia in patients with esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2018;31. https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doy047.

  23. Donohoe CL, Ryan AM, Reynolds JV. Cancer cachexia: mechanisms and clinical implications. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2011;2011:601434.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F, Higashiguchi T, Hubner M, Klek S, et al. ESPEN guideline: clinical nutrition in surgery. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(3):623–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ligthart-Melis GC, Weijs PJ, te Boveldt ND, Buskermolen S, Earthman CP, Verheul HM, et al. Dietician-delivered intensive nutritional support is associated with a decrease in severe postoperative complications after surgery in patients with esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2013;26(6):587–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJ, Nicolson M, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(1):11–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Group. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9319):1727–33.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Low DE, Kuppusamy MK, Alderson D, Cecconello I, Chang AC, Darling G, et al. Benchmarking complications associated with esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2017;269(2):291–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Biere SS, Cuesta MA, van der Peet DL. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Chir. 2009;64(2):121–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dantoc M, Cox MR, Eslick GD. Evidence to support the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2012;147(8):768–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Guo W, Ma X, Yang S, Zhu X, Qin W, Xiang J, et al. Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(9):3873–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kauppila JH, Xie S, Johar A, Markar SR, Lagergren P. Meta-analysis of health-related quality of life after minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2017;104(9):1131–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lv L, Hu W, Ren Y, Wei X. Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Onco Targets Ther. 2016;9:6751–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Nagpal K, Ahmed K, Vats A, Yakoub D, James D, Ashrafian H, et al. Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(7):1621–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sgourakis G, Gockel I, Radtke A, Musholt TJ, Timm S, Rink A, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy: meta-analysis of outcomes. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55(11):3031–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Xiong WL, Li R, Lei HK, Jiang ZY. Comparison of outcomes between minimally invasive oesophagectomy and open oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. ANZ J Surg. 2017;87(3):165–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yibulayin W, Abulizi S, Lv H, Sun W. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):304.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhou C, Zhang L, Wang H, Ma X, Shi B, Chen W, et al. Superiority of minimally invasive oesophagectomy in reducing in-hospital mortality of patients with resectable oesophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0132889.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhou C, Ma G, Li X, Li J, Yan Y, Liu P, et al. Is minimally invasive esophagectomy effective for preventing anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2015;13:269.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9829):1887–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta MA, Daams F, Roig Garcia J, Bonavina L, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophageal resection: three-year follow-up of the previously reported randomized controlled trial: the TIME trial. Ann Surg. 2017;266(2):232–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Briez N, Piessen G, Bonnetain F, Brigand C, Carrere N, Collet D, et al. Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase III trial – the MIRO trial. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:310.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Mariette C, Markar SR, Dabakuyo-Yonli TS, Meunier B, Pezet D, Collet D, et al. Abstract 615O; Hybrid Minimally Invasive vs. Open Esophagectomy for patients with Esophageal Cancer: Long-term outcomes of a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III controlled trial, the MIRO trial. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl_5):v605–49.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Giugliano DN, Berger AC, Pucci MJ, Rosato EL, Evans NR, Meidl H, et al. Comparative quantitative lymph node assessment in localized esophageal cancer patients after R0 resection with and without Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21:1377–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Visser E, van Rossum PSN, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R. Impact of lymph node yield on overall survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy for cancer: a population-based cohort study in the Netherlands. Ann Surg. 2017;266(5):863–9.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Peyre CG, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Altorki NK, Ancona E, Griffin SM, et al. The number of lymph nodes removed predicts survival in esophageal cancer: an international study on the impact of extent of surgical resection. Ann Surg. 2008;248(4):549–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Schwarz RE, Smith DD. Clinical impact of lymphadenectomy extent in resectable gastric cancer of advanced stage. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(2):317–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Rizk NP, Ishwaran H, Rice TW, Chen LQ, Schipper PH, Kesler KA, et al. Optimum lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2010;251(1):46–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tachimori Y, Ozawa S, Numasaki H, Matsubara H, Shinoda M, Toh Y, et al. Efficacy of lymph node dissection by node zones according to tumor location for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Esophagus. 2016;13:1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Deng XF, Liu QX, Zhou D, Min JX, Dai JG. Hand-sewn vs linearly stapled esophagogastric anastomosis for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(15):4757–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Wang Q, He XR, Shi CH, Tian JH, Jiang L, He SL, et al. Hand-sewn versus stapled esophagogastric anastomosis in the neck: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Indian J Surg. 2015;77(2):133–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Refai M, Brunelli A, Salati M, Xiume F, Pompili C, Sabbatini A. The impact of chest tube removal on pain and pulmonary function after pulmonary resection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41(4):820–2; discussion 3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Tang H, Xue L, Hong J, Tao X, Xu Z, Wu B. A method for early diagnosis and treatment of intrathoracic esophageal anastomotic leakage: prophylactic placement of a drainage tube adjacent to the anastomosis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(4):722–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Choi HK, Law S, Chu KM, Wong J. The value of neck drain in esophageal surgery: a randomized trial. Dis Esophagus. 2017;11(1):40–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kinjo Y, Masamoto H, Nitta H, Kinjo T, Tamaki T, Yoshimi N, et al. Fetal Sirenomelia associated with an abdominal cyst originating from a saccular cloaca. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2018;2018:7513287.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Weijs TJ, Kumagai K, Berkelmans GH, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Nilsson M, Luyer MD. Nasogastric decompression following esophagectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(3):1–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. McPhail MJ, Abu-Hilal M, Johnson CD. A meta-analysis comparing suprapubic and transurethral catheterization for bladder drainage after abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 2006;93(9):1038–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Baigrie RJ, Devitt PG, Watkin DS. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition after oesophagogastric surgery: a prospective randomized comparison. Aust N Z J Surg. 1996;66(10):668–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sun HB, Liu XB, Zhang RX, Wang ZF, Qin JJ, Yan M, et al. Early oral feeding following thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;47(2):227–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Weijs TJ, Berkelmans GH, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R, Soeters PB, et al. Routes for early enteral nutrition after esophagectomy. A systematic review. Clin Nutr. 2015;34(1):1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Weijs TJ, Berkelmans GH, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Dolmans AC, Kouwenhoven EA, Rosman C, et al. Immediate postoperative oral nutrition following esophagectomy: a multicenter clinical trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102(4):1141–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Punjasawadwong Y, Phongchiewboon A, Bunchungmongkol N. Bispectral index for improving anaesthetic delivery and postoperative recovery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;17(6):CD003843.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Brull SJ, Murphy GS. Residual neuromuscular block: lessons unlearned. Part II: methods to reduce the risk of residual weakness. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(1):129–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Neto AS, Hemmes SN, Barbas CS, Beiderlinden M, Fernandez-Bustamante A, Futier E, et al. Association between driving pressure and development of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation for general anaesthesia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(4):272–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Michelet P, D'Journo XB, Roch A, Doddoli C, Marin V, Papazian L, et al. Protective ventilation influences systemic inflammation after esophagectomy: a randomized controlled study. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(5):911–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Taniguchi H, Sasaki T, Fujita H, Kobayashi H, Kawasaki R, Ogata T, et al. Effects of goal-directed fluid therapy on enhanced postoperative recovery: an interventional comparative observational study with a historical control group on oesophagectomy combined with ERAS program. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2018;23:184–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Varadhan KK, Lobo DN. A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of intravenous fluid therapy in major elective open abdominal surgery: getting the balance right. Proc Nutr Soc. 2010;69(4):488–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Shaw AD, Bagshaw SM, Goldstein SL, Scherer LA, Duan M, Schermer CR, et al. Major complications, mortality, and resource utilization after open abdominal surgery: 0.9% saline compared to Plasma-Lyte. Ann Surg. 2012;255(5):821–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Senagore AJ, Emery T, Luchtefeld M, Kim D, Dujovny N, Hoedema R. Fluid management for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective, randomized assessment of goal-directed administration of balanced salt solution or hetastarch coupled with an enhanced recovery program. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52(12):1935–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Puckett JR, Pickering JW, Palmer SC, McCall JL, Kluger MT, De Zoysa J, et al. Low versus standard urine output targets in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a randomized noninferiority trial. Ann Surg. 2017;265(5):874–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Klevebro F, Boshier PR, Low DE. Application of standardized hemodynamic protocols within enhanced recovery programs to improve outcomes associated with anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(Suppl 5):S692–701.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Feltracco P, Bortolato A, Barbieri S, Michieletto E, Serra E, Ruol A, et al. Perioperative benefit and outcome of thoracic epidural in esophageal surgery: a clinical review. Dis Esophagus. 2017;31. https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/dox135.

  73. Popping DM, Elia N, Marret E, Remy C, Tramer MR. Protective effects of epidural analgesia on pulmonary complications after abdominal and thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2008;143(10):990–9; discussion 1000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Yeager MP, Bae EE, Parra MC, Barr PA, Bonham AK, Sites BD. Fluoroscopy-assisted epidural catheter placement: an exploratory analysis of 303 pre-operative epidurograms. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016;60(4):513–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Visser E, Marsman M, van Rossum PSN, Cheong E, Al-Naimi K, van Klei WA, et al. Postoperative pain management after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(10):1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Thangamuthu A, Russell IF, Purva M. Epidural failure rate using a standardised definition. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2013;22(4):310–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Heinink TP, Baker BG, Yates VF, Addison DC, Williams JP. The effect of anaesthetist grade and frequency of insertion on epidural failure: a service evaluation in a United Kingdom teaching hospital. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015;15:5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Motamed C, Farhat F, Remerand F, Stephanazzi J, Laplanche A, Jayr C. An analysis of postoperative epidural analgesia failure by computed tomography epidurography. Anesth Analg. 2006;103(4):1026–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Davies RG, Myles PS, Graham JM. A comparison of the analgesic efficacy and side-effects of paravertebral vs. epidural blockade for thoracotomy–a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Anaesth. 2006;96(4):418–26.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Ding X, Jin S, Niu X, Ren H, Fu S, Li Q. A comparison of the analgesia efficacy and side effects of paravertebral compared with epidural blockade for thoracotomy: an updated meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e96233.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Baidya DK, Khanna P, Maitra S. Analgesic efficacy and safety of thoracic paravertebral and epidural analgesia for thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2014;18(5):626–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):571–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Nelson G, Kiyang LN, Crumley ET, Chuck A, Nguyen T, Faris P, et al. Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) across a provincial healthcare system: the ERAS Alberta Colorectal Surgery Experience. World J Surg. 2016;40(5):1092–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Thanh NX, Chuck AW, Wasylak T, Lawrence J, Faris P, Ljungqvist O, et al. An economic evaluation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) multisite implementation program for colorectal surgery in Alberta. Can J Surg. 2016;59(6):415–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Group EC. The impact of enhanced recovery protocol compliance on elective colorectal cancer resection: results from an international registry. Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1153–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Gustafsson UO, Oppelstrup H, Thorell A, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O. Adherence to the ERAS protocol is associated with 5-year survival after colorectal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study. World J Surg. 2016;40(7):1741–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Thoracic Surgery and Thoracic Oncology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA

    Piers R. Boshier

  2. Department of Upper Abdominal Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital/Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

    Fredrik Klevebro

  3. Thoracic Surgery and Thoracic Oncology, Department of General, Thoracic & Vascular Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA

    Donald E. Low

Authors
  1. Piers R. Boshier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fredrik Klevebro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Donald E. Low
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald E. Low .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Ă–rebro University Hospital, Ă–rebro, Sweden

    Olle Ljungqvist

  2. Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Higher Kingston, Yeovil, Somerset, UK

    Nader K. Francis

  3. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s, Hospital Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Richard D. Urman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Boshier, P.R., Klevebro, F., Low, D.E. (2020). Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Recommendations for Esophagectomy. In: Ljungqvist, O., Francis, N., Urman, R. (eds) Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33443-7_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33443-7_41

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33442-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33443-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation