Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33469794›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021

Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery on Postoperative Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

Bradley White, Fadi Dahdaleh, Samer A Naffouje, Neerav Kothari, Jessica Berg, Wendy Wiemann, George I Salti

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Bradley WhiteDepartment of General Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, The University of Illinois at Chicago, 840 South Wood Street, M/C 820, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Fadi DahdalehDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Edward-Elmhurst Health, Naperville, IL, USA.
Samer A NaffoujeDepartment of Surgical Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
Neerav KothariDepartment of Anesthesia, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jessica BergDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Edward-Elmhurst Health, Naperville, IL, USA.
Wendy WiemannDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Edward-Elmhurst Health, Naperville, IL, USA.
George I SaltiDepartment of General Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, The University of Illinois at Chicago, 840 South Wood Street, M/C 820, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. geosalti@uic.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been associated with significant morbidity and increased hospital length of stay (LOS). The authors report their experience after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program for CRS-HIPEC.

methodsOutcomes were analyzed before and after ERAS implementation. The components of ERAS included preoperative carbohydrate loading, goal-directed fluid management, multimodal pain management, minimization of narcotic use, avoidance of nasogastric tubes, and early mobilization and feeding.

resultsOf 168 procedures, 88 (52%) were in the pre-ERAS group and 80 (48%) were in the post-ERAS group. The two groups did not differ in terms of age, sex, comorbidities, peritoneal carcinomatosis index scores, completeness of cytoreduction, or operative time. The ERAS patients received fewer fluids intraoperatively (mean, 4.2 vs 6.4 L; p < 0.01). The mean LOS was 7.9 days post-ERAS compared with 10.0 days pre-ERAS (p = 0.015). Clavien-Dindo complications classified as grade ≥ 3 were lower after ERAS (23.7% vs 38.6%; p = 0.04). Moreover, the readmission rates remained the same (16.2% vs 13.6%; p = 0.635).

conclusionsImplementation of an ERAS program for patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC is feasible and not associated with an increase in overall major complications or readmissions. These data support incorporation of ERAS protocols for CRS-HIPEC procedures.

Indexed as

Enhanced Recovery After SurgeryHyperthermia, InducedChemotherapy, Cancer, Regional PerfusionCombined Modality TherapyCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresHumansHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PeriodRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID33469794

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.