Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32754696›Full record

ArticleSurgery open science2019

Enhanced recovery protocol improves postoperative outcomes and minimizes narcotic use following resection for colon and rectal cancer.

Alexander R Cortez, Al-Faraaz Kassam, Nick C Levinsky, Andrew D Jung, Meghan C Daly, Shimul A Shah, Janice F Rafferty, Ian M Paquette

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery open science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexander R CortezCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Al-Faraaz KassamCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Nick C LevinskyCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Andrew D JungCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Meghan C DalyCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Shimul A ShahCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Janice F RaffertyCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
Ian M PaquetteCincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
University of Cincinnati · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhanced recovery protocols are associated with improved recovery. However, data on outcomes following the implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol in colorectal cancer are limited. We set out to study the postoperative outcomes, opioid use patterns, and cost impact for patients undergoing colon or rectal resection for cancer.

methodsA retrospective review of all elective colorectal cancer resections from January 2015 to June 2018 at a single institution was performed. Patient demographics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Colon and rectal patients were studied separately, with comparison of patients before and after the implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol.

resultsOne hundred ninety-two patients underwent elective colorectal resection for cancer. In January 2016, an enhanced recovery protocol was implemented for all elective resections - 71 patients (33 colon and 38 rectal) underwent surgery before implementation and 121 patients (56 colon and 65 rectal) underwent surgery after implementation of the enhanced recovery protocol. There were no differences with regard to age, gender, or body mass index before or after implementation (all P > .05). For both colon and rectal cancer patients, the enhanced recovery protocol reduced time to regular diet (both P < .05) and length of stay (colon: 3 vs 4 days; rectal: 4 vs 6 days; both P < .01). Enhanced recovery protocol patients also consumed fewer total narcotics (colon: 44 vs 184 morphine milligram equivalents, P < .01; rectal: 121 vs 393 morphine milligram equivalents, P < .01).

conclusionsEnhanced recovery protocol use reduced length of stay and narcotic use with similar total costs and no difference in 30-day complications for both colon and rectal cancer resections.

Identifiers

PMID32754696
PMCPMC7391893
OpenAlexW2955566210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.