Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33823871›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2021

Retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery pathways in stage II-III colorectal cancer patients submitted to surgery and adjuvant therapy.

Baoxin Wang, Zhenming Wu, Rui Zhang, Yue Chen, Jiuxing Dong, Xiuheng Qi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Post-surgical diets in the ERAS protocol: D-ERAS scoping review.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Baoxin WangDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3230-2743
Zhenming WuDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4685-2789
Rui ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7574-7390
Yue ChenDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7328-4081
Jiuxing DongDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6765-7061
Xiuheng QiDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Petrochina Central Hospital, Heibei, Langfang, 065000, China. xiuheng.qi@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2645-2796
Central Hospital of Zibo · CN

Funding

Langfang Science and Technology Support Project of Hebei Province 2020013089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is suggesting laparoscopic surgeries for colorectal cancer. Conventional perioperative procedures like long preoperative fasting and bowel procedures are not useful and harmful to patients undergoing surgeries for colorectal cancer. The objectives of the study were to compare surgery outcomes, hospital stays, and survival of patients who received fast-track (laparoscopy/open) surgical procedure followed by chemotherapy against those who received conventional (laparoscopy/open) surgical procedure followed by chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

methodsThe study analyzes the outcomes of a total of 542 colorectal cancer (preoperative biopsies stage II or III) patients submitted to surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. The study cohort is retrospectively subdivided in 4 groups submitted to open or laparoscopic resection with or without fast-track protocol appliance and two different chemotherapy regimens. Patients who ended up being TNM stage I have not received the adjuvant chemotherapy.

resultsThe fast-track surgical procedure had shorter total hospital stays and postoperative hospital stays than the conventional surgical procedures. Flatus resumption time, the time until first defecation, and intraoperative blood loss were shorter for the fast-track surgical procedures than the conventional surgical procedures. Those surgery outcomes were also shorter for the fast-track laparoscopy than the open fast-track. Resumption of a fluid diet and ambulation onset time were shorter for the fast-track surgical procedures than the conventional surgical procedures. The surgical checkpoints that were compliance by patient of fast-track surgeries were significantly fewer than those of the conventional surgeries. Clinically significant difference for QLQ-C30/CR38 score after chemotherapy was reported between patients who received open conventional surgeries and those patients who received fast-track laparoscopy (59.63 ± 2.26 score/patient vs. 71.67 ± 5.19 score/patient). There were no significant differences for the number of patients with any grade adverse effects (p = 0.431) or with grade 3-4 adverse effects (p = 0.858), and the disease-free and overall survival among cohorts.

conclusionsThe fast-track surgical procedure is effective and safe even in a multidisciplinary scenario as colorectal cancer treatment in which surgery is only a part of management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III: Technical efficacy stage: 4.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyHumansLength of StayPrognosisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeChemotherapyColorectal cancerFast-trackHospital stayLaparoscopyOpen surgical procedure

Identifiers

PMID33823871
PMCPMC8025484
OpenAlexW3146745920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.