Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23389071›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2013

Effect of epidural analgesia on bowel function in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Suhail A Khan, Haseeb A Khokhar, A R H Nasr, Eleanor Carton, Sherif El-Masry

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Laparoscopic rectal resection without epidural catheters-does it work?International journal of colorectal disease · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Suhail A KhanColorectal Unit Surgical Department, Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital Drogheda Co., Louth, Ireland. tahirkheli73@gmail.com
Haseeb A Khokhar
A R H Nasr
Eleanor Carton
Sherif El-Masry
Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUse of thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) with local anesthetic and adjuncts, such as opioids, are cornerstones of ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) and are considered to play a key role in recovery after colorectal surgery. However, its effect on bowel function may lead to prolong hospital stay and is still a matter of debate. The purpose of this systemic review was to assess whether epidural analgesia could have a detrimental effect on bowel function in laparoscopic colorectal surgery with a subsequent effect on hospital stay duration, leading to failure of ERAS in colorectal surgery.

methodsA systematic review of randomized, controlled trials for the effect of epidural analgesia on laparoscopic colorectal surgery was performed. The effect on postoperative recovery was evaluated in terms of return of bowel function as the primary outcome, whereas length of stay (LOS), pain score on visual analogue scale, operative time, and incidence of postoperative complications and side-effects of analgesia were recorded as secondary outcomes.

resultsSix trials published between 1999 and 2011 were included in the final analysis. TEA significantly improves return of bowel function assessed by time to first bowel motion [WMD -0.62 (-1.11, -0.12) with Z = 2.43; P = 0.02, 95 % confidence interval (CI)], and pain scores [WMD -1.23 (-2.4, -0.07)] with Z = 2.07; P = 0.04, 95 % CI]. TEA did not influence duration of hospital stay [WMD -0.47 (-1.55, 0.61)] with Z = 0.85 (P = 0.39, 95 % CI). No significant increase in operative time or side effects was associated with TEA.

conclusionsDespite of some beneficial effect of epidural analgesia on return of bowel function and pain in laparoscopic surgery, it does not affect LOS, which is multifactorial.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralLaparoscopyRecovery of FunctionColorectal NeoplasmsDefecationDietFlatulenceHumansLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVisual Analog Scale

Identifiers

PMID23389071
OpenAlexW2008822566

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.