Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36765534›Full record

ReviewCancers2023

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Program for Patients with Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with or without HIPEC: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis.

Manuela Robella, Marco Tonello, Paola Berchialla, Veronica Sciannameo, Alba Maria Ilari Civit, Antonio Sommariva, Cinzia Sassaroli, Andrea Di Giorgio, Roberta Gelmini, Valentina Ghirardi and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Manuela RobellaUnit of Surgical Oncology, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, 10060 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7676-9658
Marco TonelloAdvanced Surgical Oncology Unit, Surgical Oncology of the Esophagus and Digestive Tract, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, 35128 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7190-2106
Paola BerchiallaCenter for Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health (C-BEPH), Deptartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Torino, 10124 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5835-5638
Veronica SciannameoCenter for Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health (C-BEPH), Deptartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Torino, 10124 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0499-0131
Alba Maria Ilari CivitUnit of Surgical Oncology, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, 10060 Torino, Italy.
Antonio SommarivaAdvanced Surgical Oncology Unit, Surgical Oncology of the Esophagus and Digestive Tract, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, 35128 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5764-5606
Cinzia SassaroliAbdominal Oncology Department, Fondazione Giovanni Pascale, IRCCS, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Andrea Di GiorgioSurgical Unit of Peritoneum and Retroperitoneum, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli-IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3981-1145
Roberta GelminiSC Chirurgia Generale d'Urgenza ed Oncologica, AOU Policlinico di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8471-710X
Valentina GhirardiUOC Ovarian Carcinoma Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Franco RovielloUnit of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Surgery, and Neurosciences, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4122-1259
Fabio CarboniPeritoneal Tumours Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, 00144 Rome, Italy.
Piero Vincenzo LippolisGeneral and Peritoneal Surgery, Hospital University Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3671-3470
Shigeki KusamuraPeritoneal Surface Malignancies Unit, Fondazione Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3116-277X
Marco VairaUnit of Surgical Oncology, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, 10060 Torino, Italy.
Candiolo Cancer Institute · ITIstituto Oncologico Veneto · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana · ITAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena · ITFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · ITTumour Institute of Tuscany · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITUniversity of Siena · IT

Funding

Cancer Research UK 29365
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program refers to a multimodal intervention to reduce the length of stay and postoperative complications; it has been effective in different kinds of major surgery including colorectal, gynaecologic and gastric cancer surgery. Its impact in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies is still unclear. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of ERAS after cytoreductive surgery with or without HIPEC for peritoneal metastases. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Database were searched from January 2010 and December 2021. Single and double-cohort studies about ERAS application in the treatment of peritoneal cancer were considered. Outcomes included the postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and the early readmission rate. Twenty-four studies involving 5131 patients were considered, 7 about ERAS in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + HIPEC and 17 about cytoreductive alone; the case histories of two Italian referral centers in the management of peritoneal cancer were included. ERAS adoption reduced the LOS (-3.17, 95% CrI -4.68 to -1.69 in CRS + HIPEC and -1.65, 95% CrI -2.32 to -1.06 in CRS alone in the meta-analysis including 6 and 17 studies respectively. Non negligible lower postoperative morbidity was also in the meta-analysis including the case histories of two Italian referral centers. Implementation of an ERAS protocol may reduce LOS, postoperative complications after CRS with or without HIPEC compared to conventional recovery.

Indexed as

chemotherapycytoreductive surgeryERASHIPECperioperative managementperitoneal cancer

Identifiers

PMID36765534
PMCPMC9913706
OpenAlexW4317394637

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.