Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30833863›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2019

Applying Enhanced Recovery Pathways to Unique Patient Populations.

Grace C Lee, Richard A Hodin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Grace C LeeDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Richard A HodinDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways have become popular in colorectal surgery due to their associated decrease in length of stay (LOS), complications, and readmission rate. However, it is unclear if these pathways are safe, feasible, or effective in unique patient populations such as elderly patients, urgent/emergent surgeries, patients with specific comorbidities, inflammatory bowel disease, or pediatric patients. Enhanced recovery pathways appear safe in elderly patients, associated with decreased complications, though with slightly lower rates of adherence and increased LOS and readmission rates. Modified ERAS pathways have been applied to urgent and emergent surgeries, resulting in decreased morbidity and LOS. There have been no studies that performed subgroup analyses of ERAS pathways in patients with specific comorbidities. Studies investigating patients with inflammatory bowel disease on enhanced recovery pathways are extremely limited, but suggest that they are safe and feasible. Data on ERAS pathways in pediatric patients are still emerging. Therefore, though data are sparse, enhanced recovery pathways appear to be safe in unique patient populations, with similar efficacy in decreasing LOS and complications. There is an urgent need for more studies investigating these specific patient groups to aid perioperative decision making by colorectal surgeons.

Indexed as

elderlyenhanced recoveryERASpediatricurgent

Identifiers

PMID30833863
PMCPMC6395174

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.