ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2016
Clinical outcomes of the very elderly undergoing enhanced recovery programmes in elective colorectal surgery.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nursing of Gastrointestinal Peristalsis Function Recovery after Abdominal Mirror Surgery for Rectal Cancer Patients Based on Intelligent Electronic Medicine.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery-ERAS-principles, practice and feasibility in the elderly.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2018Review
- Hospitalisation in an emergency department short-stay unit compared to an internal medicine department is associated with fewer complications in older patients - an observational study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017Observational
- Practical Management of Anaesthesia in the Elderly.Drugs & aging · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) have been shown to improve short-term outcomes after major colorectal surgery. Benefits of the ERP in patients who are very elderly (VE) are less well understood. We aimed to evaluate the role of the ERP in the VE population, which for the purpose of this study was defined as any patient aged 75 years or over. Methods A prospectively compiled database was used to identify all patients aged ≥75 years who underwent elective colorectal resection in our unit between January 2011 and September 2012. These data were analysed to study the short-term outcomes in these patients and compared with those of patients aged <75 years. Results Overall, 352 patients underwent elective surgery during this period; 106 were identified as VE. The median length of stay (LOS) in the VE group was 7 days (5 days in non-VE group; p=0.002). Two-thirds (62%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. The median LOS of VE patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery was 6 days (11 days for open surgery; p=0.003). A third (33%) of the VE cohort was discharged by day 5. Of these patients, 85% underwent laparoscopic surgery. There was no statistical difference in overall complication rates (VE vs non-VE). Conclusions Accepting that some VE patients may stay in hospital for longer, this study supports our current policy of including everyone in the ERP regardless of age. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery appear to benefit, with a shorter LOS. Further large scale trials are required to support the results of this study and to identify long-term outcomes.
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.