Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22954007›Full record

ArticleHPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association2012

Implementation of an enhanced recovery programme following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Nichola Robertson, Peter James Gallacher, Natalie Peel, O James Garden, Mark Duxbury, Kristoffer Lassen, Rowan W Parks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery: a systematic review of the evidence.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Academic Pancreas Centers of Excellence: Guidance from a multidisciplinary chronic pancreatitis working group at PancreasFest.Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.]
    Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Iterative Changes in Risk-Stratified Pancreatectomy Clinical Pathways and Accelerated Discharge After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Improved Outcomes in 394 Pancreatic Cancer Resections: the Impact of Enhanced Recovery Pathway.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018
    Observational
  16. Article
  17. [Present situation and prospect of enhanced recovery after surgery in pancreatic surgery].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2017
    Review
  18. Review
  19. ERAS and pancreatic surgery: a review.Updates in surgery · 2016
    Review
  20. [Treatment of postoperative impairment of gastrointestinal motility, cholangitis and pancreatitis].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nichola RobertsonDepartment of Clinical Surgery, University of Edinburgh, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Peter James Gallacher
Natalie Peel
O James Garden
Mark Duxbury
Kristoffer Lassen
Rowan W Parks

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/693
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this prospective study was to investigate the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

methodsPatients undergoing PD were managed according to an ERAS protocol. Outcome measures included postoperative mortality, morbidity, hospitalization and 30-day readmission rate. Key protocol targets were: nasogastric tube (NGT) removal [postoperative day (PoD) 1]; resumption of oral fluids (PoD 1); urinary catheter removal (PoD 3); high-dependency unit (HDU) discharge (PoD 3); tolerating diet (PoD 4); drain removal (PoD 5), and hospital discharge (PoD 6).

resultsData were collected for 50 patients (24 male; median age 67 years). Rates of mortality, morbidity and readmission were 4%, 46% and 4%, respectively. The median length of postoperative hospitalization was 10 days. The proportions of patients achieving key targets were: 78% for NGT removal; 82% for resumption of oral fluids; 48% for urinary catheter removal; 82% for HDU discharge; 86% for tolerating diet; 84% for meeting mobility targets, and 72% for drain removal. One patient was discharged by PoD 6, eight patients by PoD 7, 15 patients by PoD 8 and 26 patients (52%) by PoD 10. Discharge was delayed in 16 patients for social or transport-related reasons.

conclusionsThe ERAS protocol was implemented safely. Achieving certain targets was challenging. Non-medical causes remain a significant factor in delayed discharge following PD.

Indexed as

PancreaticoduodenectomyAgedAnalgesicsDevice RemovalDietDrainageFemaleHospital MortalityHumansIntubation, GastrointestinalLength of StayMalePain MeasurementPatient DischargePatient ReadmissionPilot ProjectsAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID22954007
PMCPMC3461377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.