FAST-TRACK AND ERAS IN ONCOLOGIC SURGERY: OPTIMIZATION OF OUTCOMES AND ACCELERATED RECOVERY

Resumen

Enhanced recovery strategies in oncologic surgery have been widely discussed as effective approaches to reduce surgical stress and optimize clinical outcomes. This integrative review analyzed recent evidence regarding Fast-Track and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, highlighting their similarities and differences. Both models are based on a multimodal approach emphasizing optimized analgesia, early mobilization, reduced preoperative fasting, and multidisciplinary collaboration. The findings consistently demonstrate reduced length of hospital stay, lower postoperative complication rates, and faster functional recovery. However, ERAS presents a higher level of standardization, supported by evidence-based guidelines, continuous auditing, and systematic monitoring of performance indicators, which enhances reproducibility and institutional sustainability. Studies indicate that its implementation does not compromise oncologic safety, preserving survival and recurrence rates while enabling earlier initiation of adjuvant therapy. Emerging evidence also suggests a potential positive impact on long-term outcomes. In contrast, the Fast-Track model is characterized by greater operational flexibility, facilitating its initial adoption, particularly in resource-limited settings. Nevertheless, the absence of a fully structured protocol and systematic auditing may lead to variability in implementation and clinical results. In conclusion, although both models effectively improve perioperative care in oncologic surgery, ERAS demonstrates greater methodological robustness and stronger potential for consolidation as an institutional policy aimed at enhancing quality, safety, and sustainability of cancer surgical care.