ArticleBJS open2018
Benchmarking of aggregated length of stay after open and laparoscopic surgery for cancers of the digestive system.
Article in BJS open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Combined Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy and Preoperative Cachexia in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy: Is There a "Double Jeopardy"? A National Cohort Study Investigating the Association with Short- and Long-Term Outcomes.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Observational
- Effect of Volume on Postoperative Outcomes After Left Pancreatectomy: A Multicenter Prospective Snapshot Study (SPANDISPAN Project).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Benchmarking of abdominal surgery: a study evaluating the HARM score in a European national cohort.BJS open · 2020Article
- Surgical Outcomes After Pancreatic Resection of Screening-Detected Lesions in Individuals at High Risk for Developing Pancreatic Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- Contemporary practice and short-term outcomes after liver resections in a complete national cohort.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLength of hospital stay (LOS) may serve as a surrogate measure of healthcare quality and resource use, particularly when transfers of care and readmissions are accounted for. This study aimed to benchmark true hospital stay by measuring index, transfer and readmission stays across the range of digestive cancer surgery.
methodsA cohort study of all patients undergoing resection for cancer of the oesophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, colon or rectum in 2012-2016 was undertaken. Index LOS, transfer and readmission stays were merged into an 'aggregated' length of stay (a-LOS), and compared between organ sites and between open and minimal-access approaches.
resultsIn total, 24 354 resections were reported (mean age of patients 68·3 years; 51·3 per cent were men). Resections were reported as laparoscopic for 9151 procedures (37·6 per cent), with a further 283 (3·0 per cent) described as converted to open surgery. Use of a-LOS compared with standard LOS added a median of 5 days for pancreatoduodenectomy, 4 days for major liver resections, 3 days for oesophageal and gastric resections, and 2 days for minor liver, distal pancreatic and rectal resections.
conclusionOverall hospital stay across organ sites and procedures is better described by a-LOS. The study benchmarks the use of total hospital days during the first 30 days in a universal healthcare system.
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.