RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the field of liver surgery, evidence on the effectiveness of clinical pathways based on ERAS principles is limited. METHODS: This is a single-center observational study from a prospectively maintained database. Two cohorts were formed of all patients undergoing liver surgery during a defined period before (traditional management) and after introduction of a clinical pathway. Additionally, a case-match analysis-based on approach, tumor location, and Brisbane classification of resection-was performed. A cost analysis and patient satisfaction questionnaire were carried out. RESULTS: In both the overall analysis (n = 229) as well as the case-match analysis (n = 100), hospital stay was significantly reduced from 8 to 4 days and from 6.5 to 4 days, respectively (p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity (traditional management 11/50 vs clinical pathway 5/50; p = 1.00) and readmission rate did not increase. Cost analysis showed a significant decrease in postoperative costs in favor of the clinical pathway (traditional management 3666.7 vs clinical pathway 1912.2; p < 0.001). Overall, 92.3% of the survey questions were answered with satisfied (86.0%) or very satisfied (6.3%). DISCUSSION: Implementation of clinical pathway for liver surgery is feasible and safe. A clinical pathway significantly reduces hospital stay without increasing postoperative morbidity and readmission rates. Postoperative costs are significantly reduced. Patient satisfaction is high.
