SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2021
Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Flap-Based Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do multidisciplinary ERAS protocols improve flap reconstruction outcomes? A structured review of efficacy, implementation challenges, and specialty-driven adaptations.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Surgical outcomes of robotic versus conventional autologous breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- The Role of Internal Medicine or Hospitalist Co-Management in Surgical Specialties: Implications for Adult and Elderly Plastic Surgery Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Implementation Science in Breast Reconstruction: A Guide to Closing the Research-to-practice Gap.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Enhanced recovery after chest wall resection and reconstruction: a clinical practice review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- The Value of a Co-surgeon in Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- VRAM Flap for Pelvic Floor Reconstruction after Pelvic Exenteration and Abdominoperineal Excision.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Postoperative Day 1 Discharge in Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Article
- Optimizing perioperative outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction.Gland surgery · 2023Review
- Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) in DIEP-Flap Breast Reconstructions-A Comparison of Two Reconstructive Centers with and without ERAS-Protocol.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical outcomes following robotic versus conventional DIEP flap in breast reconstruction: A retrospective matched study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Cost of hospital admission after autologous breast reconstruction and factors associated with increased cost: a population-based cohort study.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways are known to improve patient outcomes after surgery. In recent years, there have been growing interest in ERAS for reconstructive surgery.
objectivesTo systematically review and summarise literature on the key components and outcomes of ERAS pathways for autologous flap-based reconstruction. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and reference lists of relevant studies. INCLUSION CRITERIA: All primary studies of ERAS pathways for free and pedicled flap-based reconstructions reported in the English language. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was length of stay. Secondary outcomes were complication rates including total flap loss, partial flap loss, unplanned reoperation within 30 days, readmission to hospital within 30 days, surgical site infections and medical complications.
resultsSixteen studies were included. Eleven studies describe ERAS pathways for autologous breast reconstructions and five for autologous head and neck reconstructions. Length of stay was lower in ERAS groups compared to control groups (mean reduction, 1.57 days; 95% CI, - 2.15 to - 0.99). Total flap loss, partial flap loss, unplanned reoperations, readmissions, surgical site infections and medical complication rates were similar between both groups. Compliance rates were poorly reported.
conclusionERAS pathways for flap-based reconstruction reduce length of stay without increasing complication rates. ERAS pathways should be adapted to each institution according to their needs, resources and caseload. There is potential for the development of ERAS pathways for chest wall, perineum and lower limb reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.