Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34277051›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021

The effect of the enhanced recovery after surgery program on lung cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rongyang Li, Kun Wang, Chenghao Qu, Weifeng Qi, Tao Fang, Weiming Yue, Hui Tian

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rongyang LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Kun WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Chenghao QuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Weifeng QiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Tao FangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Weiming YueDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Hui TianDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Shandong University · CNQilu Hospital of Shandong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related death worldwide. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is an effective evidence-based multidisciplinary protocol of perioperative care. However, the roles of ERAS in lung cancer surgery remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the short-term impact of the ERAS program on lung resection surgery, especially in relation to postoperative complications.

methodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases until October 2020 was performed to identify the studies that implemented an ERAS program in lung cancer surgery. The studies were selected and subjected to data extraction by 2 reviewers independently, which was followed by quality assessment. A random effects model was used to calculate overall effect sizes. Risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) served as the summary statistics for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were subsequently performed.

resultsA total of 21 studies with 6,480 patients were included. The meta-analysis indicated that patients in the ERAS group had a significantly reduced risk of postoperative complications (RR =0.64; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.78) and shortened postoperative length of stay (SMD=-1.58; 95% CI: -2.38 to -0.79) with a significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis showed that the risks of pulmonary (RR =0.58; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.75), cardiovascular (RR =0.73; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.89), urinary (RR =0.53; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.88), and surgical complications (RR =0.64; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.97) were significantly lower in the ERAS group. No significant reduction was found in the in-hospital mortality (RD =0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.00) and readmission rate (RR =1.00; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.32). In the qualitative review, most of the evidence reported significantly decreased hospitalization costs in the ERAS group.

conclusionsThe implementation of an ERAS program for surgery of lung cancer can effectively reduce risks of postoperative complications, length of stay, and costs of patients who have undergone lung cancer surgery without compromising their safety.

Indexed as

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)lung cancer surgerymeta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34277051
PMCPMC8264698
OpenAlexW3176293449

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.