Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31664495›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2020

Cost Analysis of Enhanced Recovery Programs in Colorectal, Pancreatic, and Hepatic Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Gaëtan-Romain Joliat, Martin Hübner, Didier Roulin, Nicolas Demartines

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Principles of enhanced recovery in gastrointestinal surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Quality Versus Costs Related to Gastrointestinal Surgery: Disentangling the Value Proposition.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Review
  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

4 authors.

Gaëtan-Romain JoliatDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8725-3494
Martin HübnerDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Didier RoulinDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nicolas DemartinesDepartment of Visceral Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. demartines@chuv.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have been shown to improve postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery. This study aimed to review the current literature to assess if ERPs in colorectal, pancreas, and liver surgery induce cost savings.

methodsA systematic review was performed including prospective and retrospective studies comparing conventional management versus ERP in terms of costs. All kinds of ERP were considered (fast-track, ERAS

resultsThirty-seven articles out of 144 identified records were scrutinized as full articles. Final analysis included 16 studies. In colorectal surgery, two studies were prospective (1 randomized controlled trial, RCT) and six retrospective, totaling 1277 non-ERP patients and 2078 ERP patients. Three of the eight studies showed no difference in cost savings between the two groups. The meta-analysis found a mean cost reduction of USD3010 (95% CI: 5370-650, p = 0.01) in favor of ERP. Among the five included studies in pancreas surgery (all retrospective, 552 non-ERP vs. 348 ERP patients), the mean cost reduction in favor of the ERP group was USD7020 (95% CI: 11,600-2430, p = 0.003). In liver surgery, only three studies (two retrospective and 1 RCT, 180 non-ERP vs. 197 ERP patients) were found, which precluded a sound cost analysis.

conclusionsThe present systematic review suggests that ERPs in colorectal and pancreas surgery are associated with cost savings compared to conventional perioperative management. Cost data in liver surgery are scarce.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryDigestive System Surgical ProceduresHumansIntestinesLength of StayLiverPancreas

Identifiers

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.