Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26937913›Full record

Trial reportMedicine2016

Enhanced Recovery Program Versus Traditional Care in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy.

Xiao Liang, Hanning Ying, Hongwei Wang, Hongxia Xu, Hong Yu, Liuxin Cai, Yifan Wang, Yifan Tong, Lin Ji, Raojun Luo and 1 more

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Reduces Hospital Costs and Improve Clinical Outcomes in Liver Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Programs for Liver Resection: a Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. THERE ARE NO ADVANTAGES BETWEEN LAPAROSCOPIC AND OPEN LIVER RESECTIONS WITHIN AN ENHANCED RECOVERY PROGRAM (ERAS).Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  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

11 authors.

Xiao LiangFrom the Department of General Surgery (LX, YH, YH, CL, WY, TY, JL, LR, CX-J); Department of Anesthesiology (WH); and Department of Nursing (XH), The Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Hanning Ying
Hongwei Wang
Hongxia Xu
Hong Yu
Liuxin Cai
Yifan Wang
Yifan Tong
Lin Ji
Raojun Luo
Xiu-Jun Cai

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has shown effectiveness in terms of reducing the hospital stay and cost associated with open liver resection. However, the benefit of ERAS in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection is still unclear, and clinical studies on this topic are limited.The ERAS program for laparoscopic liver resection was used in a group of 80 patients (ERAS group). The results were compared with those in a control group of 107 patients. All patients underwent laparoscopic liver resection. The primary endpoints were the postoperative hospital stay, defined as the number of days from surgery to discharge, and the hospitalization expense. The secondary endpoints were resumption of oral intake, readmissions, and complications.The median postoperative hospital stay was 6.2 ± 2.6 days in the ERAS group, which was significantly shorter than that in the control group (9.9 ± 5.9 d; P < 0.001). The hospitalization cost was $6871 ± 2571 in the ERAS group and $7948 ± 3630 in the control group (P = 0.020). The morbidity rate was 22.5% (18 of 80 patients) in the ERAS group and 43.9% (47 of 107 patients) in the control group (P = 0.002). There were no significant differences the in rate of readmission between the 2 groups.Enhanced recovery after surgery for laparoscopic liver resection is safe and effective. Patients in the ERPS group had a shorter hospital stay, fewer complications, and lower hospital costs.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEnteral NutritionFemaleHepatectomyHospital CostsHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPatient ReadmissionPostoperative CarePostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID26937913
PMCPMC4779010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.