Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35568722›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2022

Association between use of ERAS protocols and complications after radical cystectomy.

Hamed Ahmadi, Siamak Daneshmand

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Hamed AhmadiUSC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, USC Institute of Urology, 1441 Eastlake Ave, Suite 7416, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.
Siamak DaneshmandUSC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, USC Institute of Urology, 1441 Eastlake Ave, Suite 7416, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA. daneshma@med.usc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImplementation of enhanced recovery protocols in cystectomy patients has significantly changed the perioperative course of this major operation. This paper summarizes evidence based interventions to enhance the postoperative course of radical cystectomy.

methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed and also the results of our institutional enhanced recovery protocol were discussed.

resultsOne of the major advantages of such changes is the reduced rate of postoperative gastrointestinal (GI) complications especially postoperative ileus which could be contributed to several components of these protocols. However, Alvimopan is the only component which its use is supported by level I evidence. Although there are some evidence suggesting the decreased rate of urinary tract infection with the use of prophylactic antibiotics and wound complications by the use of negative wound pressure devices, their clear benefit is yet to be shown. Although robotic approach has proven advantages in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative blood transfusion rate, surgical team's experience and dedicated infrastructure seem to be more influential in optimized outcome than just the surgical approach.

conclusioncurrent evidence suggests that such protocols have not only reached the goal of maintaining complication rate while decreasing length of hospital stay, but it might have caused a decrease in the rate of low-grade complications, especially GI complications.

Indexed as

IleusUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsCystectomyGastrointestinal AgentsHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsGastrointestinal AgentsAlvimopanComplicationCystectomyPostoperative ileus

Identifiers

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.