SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Perioperative enhanced recovery programmes for gynaecological cancer patients.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols for minimally invasive treatment of Achilles tendon rupture: Prospective single-center randomized study.World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- A call for new standard of care in perioperative gynecologic oncology practice: Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs.Gynecologic oncology · 2016Review
- Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology.Obstetrical & gynecological survey · 2015Review
- Enhanced recovery programme in gynaecology: outcomes of a hysterectomy care pathway.BMJ quality improvement reports · 2015Article
- Effectiveness and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery programmes: a rapid evidence synthesis.BMJ open · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGynaecological malignancies contribute to 10% to 15% of cancers in women internationally. In recent years, a trend towards new perioperative care strategies has been documented as 'Fast Track (FT) surgery', or 'Enhanced Recovery Programmes' to replace some traditional approaches in surgical care. The FT multimodal programmes may enhance the postoperative recovery by means of reducing surgical stress. This systematic review aims to assess fully the beneficial and harmful effects of FT programmes in gynaecological cancer care.
objectivesTo evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of FT programmes in gynaecological cancer care. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the following databases, The Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group's Trial Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 4, 2009, MEDLINE and EMBASE to November 2009. In addition, all reference lists of included trials were searched and experts in the gynaecological oncology community were contacted in an attempt to locate trials. This search was updated and re-run to 1 May 2012, for this update. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any type of FT programmes for surgery in gynaecological cancer to conventional recovery strategies were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion. Since no RCTs were identified, data collection and analysis could not be performed. MAIN
resultsNo studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe currently have no evidence from high-quality studies to support or refute the use of perioperative enhanced recovery programmes for gynaecological cancer patients. Further well-designed RCTs with standard FT programmes are needed. This review has been updated in 2012. The results of the original review published in 2010 remain unchanged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.