Menu
Recruiting NCT07643285

Feasibility and Safety of a Pediatric ERAS Protocol for Laparoscopic Appendectomy

No phase Interventional Appendectomy, Laparoscopic Acute Appendicitis Pediatric Surgery ERAS

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: Comprehensive 20-Item Pediatric ERAS Protocol.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Appendectomy, Laparoscopic, Acute Appendicitis, Pediatric Surgery, ERAS. Basic parameters: 5 years — 18 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Turkey (Türkiye)
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Clinical Outcomes and Institutional Integration of the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) Protocol in Pediatric Appendicetomies: A Mixed Methodological IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term Study) 2a Preliminary Study

Overview

Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Despite the widespread adoption of laparoscopic appendectomy, postoperative care still varies widely between institutions, with prolonged fasting, opioid-based analgesia, delayed feeding, and routine drain placement being common. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based, multidisciplinary care pathway that has been shown in adults - and increasingly in children - to reduce length of stay, opioid consumption, and postoperative complications. This single-center, prospective, single-arm cohort feasibility study (IDEAL Stage 2a) tests whether a comprehensive 20-item pediatric ERAS protocol, adapted for minimally invasive appendectomy in children aged 5-18 with non-complicated acute appendicitis (ASA I-II), can be implemented with high fidelity and acceptable safety in a tertiary academic pediatric surgery department. We aim to enroll 100 patients to obtain \~80 evaluable cases. The primary endpoint is the global ERAS compliance rate (target ≥80%, with the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval staying above 70%). Co-primary safety endpoints include Clavien-Dindo ≥III complications and 30-day unplanned readmission rates, both targeted at \<5%. Secondary endpoints include time to medical readiness for discharge, actual length of stay, opioid sparing, and parent-reported outcomes. The study includes a structured run-in phase (first 5 patients) with explicit decision logic to either continue with the protocol unchanged or revise it before full enrollment. Audit-and-feedback cycles every 20 patients monitor compliance drift. The findings will inform a definitive institutional clinical guideline and provide hypothesis-generating data for future multi-center trials.

Detailed description

Background and Rationale Acute appendicitis affects roughly 1 in 10 children in their lifetime and remains the leading cause of emergency abdominal surgery in pediatric populations. Although laparoscopic appendectomy has become the standard of care for non-complicated cases, perioperative practice patterns vary substantially. Routine prolonged preoperative fasting, opioid-based postoperative analgesia, delayed enteral feeding, and the prophylactic use of nasogastric tubes, abdominal drains, and urinary catheters persist in many institutions despite evidence to the contrary. This unwarranted clinical variation prolongs recovery, increases adverse events, and exposes children to avoidable opioid exposure.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols package multiple evidence-based perioperative interventions into a coordinated multidisciplinary care pathway. Adult ERAS programs have consistently demonstrated reductions in complications, length of stay, and resource utilization. Pediatric ERAS adoption has lagged but is accelerating, particularly in colorectal, urological, and now general surgical contexts. Most pediatric ERAS reports to date, however, focus on elective procedures - applying ERAS to a time-pressured, emergent context like acute appendicitis introduces operational challenges (limited preoperative optimization window, variable family preparation, fluctuating staffing) that must be tested locally before adoption.

Conceptual Framework This study follows the IDEAL Framework Stage 2a (Development) for surgical innovation: a structured, prospective evaluation of a defined protocol in a single center, with explicit revision logic and transparent reporting. Implementation science elements are integrated through (a) Knowledge-Attitudes-Practice (KAP) surveys before and after the pilot, (b) a CFIR 2.0-informed barriers assessment, and (c) NoMAD-based normalization process measures. The study is registered as interventional (single-group assignment, open-label; Health Services Research) because all enrolled patients are prospectively and uniformly exposed to the institutional ERAS protocol as a defined health-services intervention. There is no randomization and no experimental drug or device assignment; the protocol is applied to consecutive eligible patients.

The 20-Item ERAS Protocol

The protocol spans the perioperative pathway in three blocks:

Preoperative (5 items): ERAS counseling and family education; avoidance of prolonged fasting (clear fluids permitted up to 2 hours; solids ≥6 hours); no oral carbohydrate loading (acute appendicitis context); no mechanical bowel preparation; restricted sedative premedication.

Intraoperative (9 items): timely prophylactic antibiotics (within 30-60 min of incision); regional analgesia with 0.25% bupivacaine port-site infiltration; short-acting anesthetic agents; restricted intraoperative opioid (\<0.1 mg/kg morphine equivalent); active normothermia (core temp \>36 °C); goal-directed euvolemic fluid therapy (3-7 mL/kg/h crystalloid, zero balance target); minimally invasive surgical approach; avoidance of routine drains/tubes; universal PONV prophylaxis (ondansetron + dexamethasone 0.15 mg/kg, max 8 mg).

Postoperative (6 items): early NG tube removal; early oral feeding (clear fluids within 2-4 hours; staged advancement to age-appropriate diet); early IV fluid discontinuation (saline lock once 100 mL tolerated orally); early mobilization (out of bed by hour 4, corridor walk by hour 6); multimodal scheduled "zigzag" oral analgesia (paracetamol 15 mg/kg PO q6h alternating with ibuprofen 10 mg/kg PO q6h, every 3 hours); criterion-based discharge planning.

Decision Algorithms

Three algorithms standardize bedside decisions:

* PONV cascade (3 levels: nausea → 30-min pause; first emesis → rescue antiemetic from a different receptor class with 1-hour wait then re-challenge from clear fluids; clinically significant emesis → suspend ERAS feeding goals, restart IV maintenance, surgical reassessment for ileus/mechanical/leak); * Rescue analgesia (triggered by VAS ≥5 in patients ≥7 years or FLACC ≥5 in \<7 years on two consecutive measurements 30 minutes apart, despite scheduled paracetamol+ibuprofen; managed with low-dose IV opioid recorded as rescue, not as a protocol deviation); * Medical Readiness for Discharge (MRD): a six-criterion checklist (tolerating ≥Phase 2 diet without vomiting; oral analgesia adequate VAS/FLACC \<4; age-appropriate ambulation; spontaneous urine output; family preparedness; physiologic stability with SpO2 \>95% on room air, temperature \<38 °C in last 4 hours, vital signs within PALS limits). Notably, gas/stool passage is explicitly NOT an MRD criterion. After MRD, patients enter a brief "in-hospital home simulation" phase before actual discharge to measure the institutional/cultural delay (Δ time = T-discharge - T-MRD).

Run-in Phase and Decision Gate

Per IDEAL Stage 2a methodology, the first 5 enrolled patients constitute a Run-in (Vanguard) phase. After the 5th patient, the leadership team conducts an Early Safety and Compliance Audit:

* Decision A (Protocol Stable): if ≥70% compliance and no Clavien-Dindo ≥III complications, the patients are included in the main analysis and enrollment continues. * Decision B (Protocol Revision): if a systemic implementability barrier is identified, the first 5 patients are excluded from primary feasibility analysis, the protocol is revised to Version 2.0, ethics committee notification/approval is obtained, and the screening target is increased to N=105 to preserve statistical power. A pre-specified sensitivity analysis includes the original 5 patients in an "all-enrolled" set for transparency.

Audit and Feedback Compliance scorecard data are reviewed every 20 patients (h20, h40, h60, h80) by the leadership team. Compliance items are dichotomously coded (1=achieved, 0=not). Up to 3 items may be voided due to medical contraindication; ≥4 voided items classify the patient as "complex" and exclude them from the primary compliance analysis. Rescue analgesia use does NOT affect compliance scoring of the multimodal oral analgesia item but is reported as a secondary metric (total opioid consumption in mg/kg morphine equivalents).

Stopping Rules (3-tier) Level 1 (Immediate report): Any Clavien-Dindo ≥III complication is reported to the IRB within 24 hours as a Serious Adverse Event.

Level 2 (Temporary halt): Triggered by (a) any Grade IV/V complication, OR (b) cumulative Clavien-Dindo ≥III rate exceeding 10% in any consecutive 10-patient window, OR (c) unplanned true readmission rate exceeding 10% in any consecutive 10-patient window. Enrollment pauses; the leadership team holds an emergency safety meeting with at least one independent senior clinician (department chair or hospital quality/safety representative) as observer.

Level 3 (Permanent halt): If post-pause review concludes the complications are protocol-attributable, the study is permanently terminated and the IRB is notified with a detailed report.

Mixed Methods and Implementation Science The study uses a Concurrent Embedded mixed-methods design. Quantitative implementation outcomes (compliance, MRD time, length of stay, complications, opioid use) are integrated with provider surveys (KAP pre/post, CFIR Barriers, NoMAD post-pilot) and parent-reported outcomes (study-specific PROMs CRF: VAS for parental anxiety/satisfaction, categorical Yes/No items for quality of recovery). Qualitative content analysis of an open-ended PROMs question uses two-coder blinded review with Cohen's κ ≥0.70 threshold and third-coder consensus arbitration.

Statistical Analysis Sample size: precision-based, single-proportion formula yields n=80 evaluable patients to estimate compliance at 80% with a 95% CI half-width of ±8.7% (lower bound 71.3%, upper 88.7%) - verified in G\*Power 3.1 ('Proportion: Confidence Interval Width' module). Allowing for \~20% cumulative attrition (10-15% intraoperative reclassification, 2-5% laparoscopic-to-open conversion, 3-5% follow-up loss), 100 patients are enrolled.

The primary endpoint compliance rate is reported as a point estimate with Wilson 95% CI. Co-primary safety endpoints (Clavien-Dindo ≥III, 30-day readmission) are similarly reported. Critical-item compliance is reported per item with 95% CIs. Survey modules: KAP pre vs post - Wilcoxon signed-rank if paired n ≥15, otherwise descriptive only; KAP/CFIR Cronbach α ≥0.70 threshold reported (gating); NoMAD α reported but non-gating. Subgroup analyses are exploratory/hypothesis-generating. Missing data: pre-specified multiple imputation thresholds. Reporting follows CONSORT-Pilot.

Anticipated Outcomes If feasibility is demonstrated (compliance ≥80% with CI lower bound \>70%, safety endpoints below 5%), the protocol will be formalized as the institutional standard for non-complicated pediatric appendectomy and will inform a planned multi-center IDEAL Stage 3 trial. If feasibility is not demonstrated, the audit data will identify specific implementability barriers for targeted revision before any further deployment.

Interventions

  • Other Comprehensive 20-Item Pediatric ERAS Protocol
    A multidisciplinary 20-item perioperative care pathway spanning preoperative (5 items: family education, fasting management with clear fluids permitted up to 2 hours preoperatively, no oral carbohydrate loading, no mechanical bowel preparation, restricted sedative premedication), intraoperative (9 items: timely prophylactic antibiotics within 30-60 min of incision, regional analgesia with 0.25% bupivacaine port-site infiltration, short-acting anesthetic agents, restricted intraoperative opioid \

Primary outcome measures

  • Global ERAS Compliance Rate [Time frame: Index hospitalization, from preoperative admission through actual discharge (typically ≤72 hours).]
  • Postoperative Major Complication and Unplanned Readmission Rate (30-day)(Co-primary) [Time frame: 30 days postoperative.]
Secondary outcome measures (12)
  • Critical-Item Compliance Rate [Time frame: From surgery (Day 0) through hospital discharge, an average of 2 days]
  • Time to Medical Readiness for Discharge (MRD) [Time frame: From PACU arrival until MRD criteria met (typically ≤48 hours).]
  • Actual Length of Hospital Stay [Time frame: From end of surgery to actual hospital discharge, an average of 2 days]
  • Delta Time (Institutional Discharge Delay Metric) [Time frame: From objective medical readiness (T-MRD) to actual hospital discharge, an average of 1 day]
  • Time to First Oral Tolerance (Water) [Time frame: From end of surgery (Day 0) to first successful oral water tolerance, an average of 4 hours]
  • Time to First Unsupported Ambulation [Time frame: From end of surgery (Day 0) to first unsupported ambulation, an average of 8 hours]
  • Time to First Age-Appropriate Normal Diet (Phase 3) [Time frame: From end of surgery (Day 0) to first tolerated age-appropriate normal diet, an average of 24 hours.]
  • Total Rescue Opioid Consumption (0-24 hours) [Time frame: First 24 hours postoperative.]
  • Parent-Reported Outcomes (PROMs) - Anxiety, Satisfaction, Quality of Recovery [Time frame: Pre-discharge (typically postoperative day 0-2).]
  • Provider Knowledge-Attitudes-Practice (KAP) Change [Time frame: Pre-pilot (before patient enrollment) and post-pilot (after final patient enrollment), approximately 12 months apart.]
  • CFIR Barriers Assessment [Time frame: Pre-pilot (before patient enrollment).]
  • NoMAD Normalization Process Measure [Time frame: Post-pilot (within 1 month of last patient discharge).]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Pediatric patients aged 5 to 18 years (preschool, school-age, and adolescent).
  • Acute appendicitis without preoperative radiologic or clinical evidence of complication/perforation, who are candidates for and accept laparoscopic surgery.
  • ASA Physical Status I (healthy) or ASA II (mild systemic disease).
  • Family/legal guardians literate in Turkish (or the institution's primary service language) and able to comprehend the educational materials.
  • Written informed consent from parents/legal guardians; for children of sufficient developmental maturity (generally ≥7 years), age-appropriate written assent.

Exclusion criteria

  • Preoperative imaging or clinical evidence of complicated appendicitis (perforation, generalized peritonitis, intra-abdominal abscess) anticipated to require an extended procedure (anastomosis, resection, or extensive peritoneal irrigation).
  • History of chronic pain syndrome or regular/sustained opioid use within the past 3 months.
  • Therapeutic preoperative antibiotic treatment for an active infection (other than surgical prophylaxis).
  • ASA III or higher; immunosuppression, progressive neurological disease, chronic inflammatory bowel disease, or other significant comorbidities likely to interfere with postoperative recovery/mobilization.
  • Anatomic/mechanical contraindications to laparoscopy or pneumoperitoneum (e.g., prior major open abdominal surgery with suspected adhesions, abdominal wall defects).

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation
N/A
Model
Single group
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Health services research

Study locations

Turkey (Türkiye) · 1 center
  • Erciyes University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery — Kayseri

Publications

  • Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, Lancaster GA; PAFS consensus group. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ. 2016 Oct 24;355:i5239. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5239. PMID 27777223
  • Finch TL, Girling M, May CR, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, McColl E, Steen IN, Cook C, Vernazza CR, Mackintosh N, Sharma S, Barbery G, Steele J, Rapley T. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 15;18(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018 PMID 30442094
  • Damschroder LJ, Reardon CM, Widerquist MAO, Lowery J. The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implement Sci. 2022 Oct 29;17(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0. PMID 36309746
  • Singh N, Ahn J, Chen X, Park S, Singh S, Cardamone S, Davis R, Hsieh H, Moore RP. Improved Post-Operative Outcomes and Reduced Narcotic Use With ERAS Protocol in a Pediatric Ambulatory Surgery Setting. Paediatr Neonatal Pain. 2025 Mar 10;7(1):e70004. doi: 10.1002/pne2.70004. eCollection 2025 Mar. PMID 40066436
  • Selesner L, Gutierrez A, Vaughn C, Graveson A, Yoo A, Wooten A, Wilson R, Jafri M, Azarow K, Krishnaswami S, Fialkowski E. Standardized Perioperative Protocols and Variance in Pediatric Surgery. JAMA Surg. 2025 Oct 1;160(10):1108-1116. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2025.2927. PMID 40833680
  • Roberts K, Brindle M, McLuckie D. Enhanced recovery after surgery in paediatrics: a review of the literature. BJA Educ. 2020 Jul;20(7):235-241. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2020.03.004. Epub 2020 May 6. No abstract available. PMID 33456956
  • Strine AC, Chu DI, Brockel MA, Wilcox DT, Vricella GJ, Coplen DE, Traxel EJ, Chaudhry R, VanderBrink BA, Yerkes EB, Chan YY, Burjek NE, Zee RS, Herndon CDA, Ahn JJ, Merguerian PA, Meenakshi-Sundaram B, Rensing AJ, Frimberger D, Rove KO; PURSUE Study Group. Feasibility of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation in Pediatric Urology: Pilot-phase outcomes of a prospective, multi-center PMID 38212167

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07643285 · ERU-PEDERAS-2026-263

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗