Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32974781›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2021

Enhanced recovery after abdominal wall reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lise Lode, Erling Oma, Nadia A Henriksen, Kristian K Jensen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sustainability in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: An Eco-Audit of the Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Pathway.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. A structured pathway for developing your complex abdominal hernia service: our York pathway.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2021
    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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lise LodeDepartment of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730, Herlev, Denmark. lise_lode@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4576-0367
Erling OmaDigestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nadia A HenriksenDepartment of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730, Herlev, Denmark.
Kristian K JensenDigestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bispebjerg Hospital · DKGentofte Hospital · DKHerlev Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are evidence-based protocols associated with improved patient outcomes. The use of ERAS pathways is well documented in various surgical specialties. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of ERAS protocols in patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR).

methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. The databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched for original studies comparing ERAS with standard care in patients undergoing AWR. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS) and secondary outcomes were readmission and surgical site infection (SSI) and/or surgical site occurrences (SSO).

resultsFive studies were included in the meta-analysis. All were retrospective cohort studies including 453 patients treated according to ERAS protocols, and 494 patients treated according to standard care. The meta-analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing AWR managed with ERAS had a mean 0.89 days reduction in LOS compared with patients treated with standard care (95% CI - 1.70 to - 0.07 days, p = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in readmission rate (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.87, p = 1.00) or SSI/SSO (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.11, p = 0.56) between groups.

conclusionsThe use of ERAS in patients undergoing AWR was found to significantly reduce LOS without increasing the readmission rate or SSI/SSO. Based on the existing literature, ERAS protocols should be implemented for patients undergoing AWR.

Indexed as

Abdominal WallEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryHumansRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesERASLength of stayPostoperative complicationsRecoveryVentral hernia repair

Identifiers

PMID32974781
OpenAlexW3089040192

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.