Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31900738›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2020

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Reduces Hospital Costs and Improve Clinical Outcomes in Liver Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

L Noba, S Rodgers, C Chandler, A Balfour, D Hariharan, V S Yip

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 108 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
108citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
23.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT06239831 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Postoperative Respiratory and Activity Monitoring

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Colorado, DenverRan2022 to 2026Enrolled30ConditionsHypoventilation, Hypoxemia, Postoperative Pulmonary ComplicationsArmsExSpiron and ActivPAL Monitors
NCT06549829 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Nutrition-Optimized Prehabilitation's Impact on Perioperative Outcomes in Primary Liver Carcinoma: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSecond Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of MedicineRan2024 to 2026Enrolled120ConditionsHepatocellular Carcinoma, Liver Carcinoma, Hepatobiliary CancersArmsNutritional optimization-led triple prehabilitation Intervention, Conventional triple prehabilitation Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

108 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 219 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Early versus the traditional start of oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Comparison of interventions and outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2456 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis cases.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021
    Pooled it
  11. [Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemihepatectomy: The ORANGE II PLUS Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Trial
  14. Barriers and Facilitators of Surgical Prehabilitation Adherence from the Patient Perspective: a Mixed Method Study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

48 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

L NobaSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK. lyrics.noba@outlook.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5389-7937
S RodgersSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK.
C ChandlerSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Old College, South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH8 9YL, UK.
A BalfourSurgical Services, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, EH1 3EG, UK.
D HariharanHepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) Unit, Royal London Hospital (Barts Health NHS Trust), London, E1 1FR, UK.
V S YipHepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) Unit, Royal London Hospital (Barts Health NHS Trust), London, E1 1FR, UK.
Edinburgh College · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBNHS Lothian · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are evidence-based, multimodal and patient-centred approach to optimize patient care and experience during their perioperative pathway. It has been shown to be effective in reducing length of hospital stay and improving clinical outcomes. However, evidence on its effective in liver surgery remains weak. The aim of this review is to investigate clinical benefits, cost-effectiveness and compliance to ERAS protocols in liver surgery.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted using CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane for randomized control trials (RCTs) and cohort studies published between 2008 and 2019, comparing effect of ERAS protocols and standard care on hospital cost, LOS, complications, readmission, mortality and compliance.

resultsThe search resulted in 6 RCTs and 21 cohort studies of 3739 patients (1777 in ERAS and 1962 in standard care group). LOS was reduced by 2.22 days in ERAS group (MD = -2.22; CI, -2.77 to -1.68; p < 0.00001) compared to the standard care group. Fewer patients in ERAS group experienced complications (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.65-0.77; p = < 0.00001). Hospital cost was significantly lower in the ERAS group (SMD = -0.98; CI, -1.37 to - 0.58; p < 0.0001).

conclusionOur review concluded that the introduction of ERAS protocols is safe and feasible in hepatectomies, without increasing mortality and readmission rates, whilst reducing LOS and risk of complications, and with a significant hospital cost savings. Laparoscopic approach may be necessary to reduce complication rates in liver surgery. However, further studies are needed to investigate overall compliance to ERAS protocols and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Enhanced Recovery After SurgeryHospital CostsHumansLength of StayLiverPostoperative ComplicationsRecovery of FunctionEnhanced recovery after surgeryLiver surgerySystematic review and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID31900738
PMCPMC7165160
OpenAlexW2997969453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.