Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28761868›Full record

ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2017

Standardizing the Protocols for Enhanced Recovery From Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Are We a Step Closer to Ideal Recovery?

Mosab Shetiwy, Tamer Fady, Fayez Shahatto, Ahmed Setit

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Is the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program Effective and Safe in Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. 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

4 authors.

Mosab ShetiwyDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology Unit, Oncology Center, Mansoura University (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt.
Tamer FadyDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology Unit, Oncology Center, Mansoura University (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt.
Fayez ShahattoDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology Unit, Oncology Center, Mansoura University (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt.
Ahmed SetitDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology Unit, Oncology Center, Mansoura University (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEnhanced recovery protocols are being implemented into the standard of care in surgical practice. This study aimed to insert a steadfast set of elements into the perioperative care pathway to establish an improved recovery program for colorectal cancer patients.

methodsSeventy patients planned for elective laparoscopic colorectal resection were randomized into 2 groups: conventional recovery group (n = 35) and enhanced recovery group (n = 35). The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included the times of removal of nasogastric tubes (NGTs), successful enteral feeding, and removal of drains, postoperative complications, intra-hospital mortality, and rate of readmission.

resultsThe mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.49 ± 0.85 days vs. 13.31 ± 6.9 days (P < 0.001), the mean time of removal of NGTs was 0.77 ± 1.031 days vs. 3.26 ± 2.737 days (P < 0.001), the mean time of successful enteral feeding was 1.89 ± 1.13 days vs. 5.46 ± 1.67 days (P < 0.001), and the mean time for removal of intra-abdominal drains was 2.94 ± 1.056 days vs. 9.06 ± 3.757 days (P < 0.001) for the enhanced and the conventional groups, respectively. Complications were significantly lower among patients in the enhanced group (25.7% vs. 65.7%) (P = 0.001). The rates of readmission were similar in the 2 groups.

conclusionApplying definite evidence-based elements to the colorectal rehabilitation program significantly boosts the recovery pathway with favorable outcomes, including faster recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, lower morbidities, and eventually earlier discharge from the hospital.

Indexed as

Colorectal surgeryFast track surgeryLaparoscopyPerioperative careProspective studies

Identifiers

PMID28761868
PMCPMC5534500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.