Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026
Author Spotlight: Implementing the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Concept in Rehabilitation Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Published on: March 1, 2024
Optimising postoperative spine outcomes: an umbrella review of enhanced recovery after spinal surgery (ERASS)
Daniel Sescu1, Devika Dahiya2, Laura Scaramuzzo3
1The School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Edinburgh Spinal Surgery Outcome Studies Group, Edinburgh, UK.
Background:
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to improve recovery, reduce complications, and optimise surgical outcomes. Despite increasing use in spinal surgery, no standardised ERAS for spinal surgery (ERASS) exists and evidence synthesis is limited. This umbrella review consolidates findings from systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of ERASS and identify research gaps.
Methods:
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science (1990-2024) identified SRs and MAs on ERASS. Data extraction followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR), with quality assessed using AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS. Overlapping primary studies were removed before recalculating pooled estimates using fixed or random-effects models based on heterogeneity. Primary outcomes included length of stay, postoperative complications, readmission rates, healthcare costs, pain scores, and opioid consumption.
Results:
Seventeen SRs and 55 MAs (319 primary studies; n=221 605 participants) were included. ERASS significantly reduced length of stay (-1.55 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.83 to -1.27 days; P<0.01), postoperative complications (relative risk=0.61; 95% CI 0.52-0.72; P<0.01), opioid consumption (-7.26 mg morphine equivalents; 95% CI -10.82 to -3.70 mg; P<0.01), and healthcare costs (-$1029.41 per patient; 95% CI -$1630.17 to -$428.65; P<0.01). Readmission rates were not significantly impacted (relative risk=0.91; P=0.38). Pain scores showed a modest, non-significant reduction (-0.27; 95% CI -0.66 to 0.13; P=0.19). High heterogeneity was observed, reflecting protocol and design variation.
Conclusions:
ERASS protocols significantly improve surgical efficiency and safety. Standardised guidelines and future research addressing heterogeneity, under-represented ERASS elements, and long-term outcomes are needed.
Systematic Review Protocol:
PROSPERO (CRD42024578786).
