ArticleJPRAS open2019
Improved patient outcomes using the enhanced recovery pathway in breast microsurgical reconstruction: a UK experience.
Article in JPRAS open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Flap-Based Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Acceptance of outpatient enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS©) protocols for implant-based breast reconstruction nudged on by the COVID-19 pandemic.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2024Article
- Buried Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Outcomes and Technical Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of Pain Management Strategies to Reduce Opioid Use Postoperatively in Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: Pain Catheter versus Nerve Block in Addition to Refinements in the Oral Pain Management Regime.Archives of plastic surgery · 2024Article
- Moving the needle: a narrative review of enhanced recovery protocols in breast reconstruction.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Review
- Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Pathway for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Individuals Undergoing Chest Reconstruction Surgery: An Observational Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Survey of Surgeon-reported Postoperative Protocols for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap in Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- The Safety of Same-day Discharge after Immediate Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
- Prospective analysis of goal-directed fluid therapy vs conventional fluid therapy in perioperative outcome of composite resections of head and neck malignancy with free tissue transfer.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway is a protocol aimed at optimizing patient care by reducing the physiological alterations caused by surgery, thus reducing recovery time, surgical morbidities and length of stay. This study assessed the impact of ERAS on patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction.
methodsPatients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction over an eight-month period were retrospectively examined. LOS, complication rates and perioperative outcomes were analysed. Results were compared between patients admitted on the traditional recovery after surgery (TRAS) and the ERAS pathways.
resultsOne hundred and thirty-eight patients were included. Seventy-two patients were admitted on the TRAS pathway and 66 patients on the ERAS pathway. There was no difference in median LOS (4 days) between the two groups, p = 0.48. We noted a significant reduction in the total number of major complications (ERAS 11%, TRAS 24% p = 0.04) as well as significant differences in time to catheter removal, time to independent mobilisation, total opioid usage and time to removal of PCA, all in favour of the ERAS group. There was a non-significant reduction in return to theatre and readmission rate in the ERAS group (11% versus 21% p = 0.1 and 6% versus 11% p = 0.29 respectively). Obesity and complications were predictors of a prolonged LOS.
conclusionThe ERAS pathway reduced overall and major complication rates in a tertiary centre using an already streamlined service. Adoption of ERAS pathways to reduce surgical morbidities and improve patient care is encouraged. Further work is required to optimise enhanced recovery in breast microsurgical reconstruction.
Indexed as
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.