Overall , there is little direct evidence for components of ERAS , with much derived from nonesophageal thoracoabdominal surgery .
ERAS in principle seems logical and safe for esophagectomy .
OBJECTIVE This article aims to provide the first systematic review of enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) programs for  esophagectomy  and generate guidelines .
BACKGROUND ERAS programs use multimodal approaches to reduce complications and accelerate recovery .
Although ERAS is well established in colorectal surgery , experience after esophagectomy has been minimal .
However , esophagectomy remains an extremely high-risk operation , commonly performed in patients with significant comorbidities .
Consequently , ERAS may have a significant role to play in improving outcomes .
No guidelines or review s have been published in esophagectomy .
Goal-directed intraoperative therapy reduces morbidity and length of hospital stay in high-risk surgical patients.
BACKGROUND Postoperative organ failures commonly occur after major abdominal surgery , increasing the utilization of re sources and costs of care . Tissue hypoxia is a key trigger of organ dysfunction . A therapeutic strategy design ed to detect and reverse tissue hypoxia , as diagnosed by an increase of oxygen extraction ( O2ER ) over a predefined threshold , could decrease the incidence of organ failures . The primary aim of this study was to compare the number of patients with postoperative organ failure and length of hospital stay between those r and omized to conventional vs a protocol ized strategy design ed to maintain O2ER < 27 % . METHODS A prospect i ve , r and omized , controlled trial was performed in nine hospitals in Italy . One hundred thirty-five high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were r and omized in two groups . All patients were managed to achieve st and ard goals : mean arterial pressure > 80 mm Hg and urinary output > 0.5 mL/kg/h . The patients of the " protocol group " ( group A ) were also managed to keep O2ER < 27 % . MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS In group A , fewer patients had at least one organ failure ( n = 8 , 11.8 % ) than in group B ( n = 20 , 29.8 % ) [ p < 0.05 ] , and the total number of organ failures was lower in group A than in group B ( 27 failures vs 9 failures , p < 0.001 ) . Length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the protocol group than in the control group ( 11.3 + /- 3.8 days vs 13.4 + /- 6.1 days , p < 0.05 ) . Hospital mortality was similar in both groups . CONCLUSIONS Early treatment directed to maintain O2ER at < 27 % reduces organ failures and hospital stay of high-risk surgical patients . Clinical trials.gov reference No. NCT00254150
Overall , there is little direct evidence for components of ERAS , with much derived from nonesophageal thoracoabdominal surgery .
ERAS in principle seems logical and safe for esophagectomy .
OBJECTIVE This article aims to provide the first systematic review of enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) programs for  esophagectomy  and generate guidelines .
BACKGROUND ERAS programs use multimodal approaches to reduce complications and accelerate recovery .
Although ERAS is well established in colorectal surgery , experience after esophagectomy has been minimal .
However , esophagectomy remains an extremely high-risk operation , commonly performed in patients with significant comorbidities .
Consequently , ERAS may have a significant role to play in improving outcomes .
No guidelines or review s have been published in esophagectomy .