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 .
Is Urinary Drainage Necessary During Continuous Epidural Analgesia After Colonic Resection?
Background and Objectives Postoperative urinary retention may occur in between 10 % and 60 % of patients after major surgery . Continuous lumbar epidural analgesia , in contrast to thoracic epidural analgesia , may inhibit urinary bladder function . Postoperative urinary drainage has been common in patients with continuous epidural analgesia , despite the lack of scientific evidence for its indication after thoracic epidural analgesia . This study describes 100 patients who underwent elective colonic resection with 48 hours of continuous thoracic epidural analgesia and only 24 hours of urinary drainage .  Methods This is a prospect i ve , uncontrolled study with well-defined general anesthesia , postoperative analgesia , and nursing care programs in patients with a planned 2-day hospital stay , urinary catheter removal on the first postoperative morning , and epidural catheter removal on the second postoperative morning . Follow-up in the outpatient clinic was on days 8 and 30 . Results Nine patients needed bladder recatheterization , 8 as a single procedure and 1 patient a second recatheterization with removal on day 7 . This patient had urinary infection on day 10 and was readmitted for 5 days because of urosepsis and , subsequently , for cystitis and left-sided epididymitis . Three patients had uncomplicated urinary infection . No patients had urological complaints at 30 days follow-up ( 95 % confidence limit , 0 % to 3.6 % ) . Conclusion The low incidence of urinary retention ( 9 % ) and urinary infection ( 4 % ) suggests that routine bladder catheterization beyond postoperative day 1 may not be necessary in patients with ongoing continuous low-dose thoracic epidural analgesia
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 .