Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36793310›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023

Optimal discharge planning for esophagectomy patients with enhanced recovery after surgery: Recommendations.

Kunzhi Li, Kangning Wang, Xing Wei, Xuefeng Leng, Qiang Fang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kunzhi LiDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Kangning WangDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xing WeiDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xuefeng LengDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Qiang FangDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNSichuan Cancer Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Studies have suggested that the postoperative length of stay (PLOS) of esophagectomy patients under the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway should be >10 days as against the previously recommended 7 days. We investigated the distribution and influencing factors of PLOS in the ERAS pathway in order to recommend an optimal planned discharge time. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study of 449 patients with thoracic esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy and perioperative ERAS between January 2013 and April 2021. We established a database to prospectively document the causes of delayed discharge. Results: The mean and median PLOS were 10.2 days and 8.0 days (range: 5-97), respectively. Patients were divided into four groups: group A (PLOS ≤ 7 days), 179 patients (39.9%); group B (8 ≤ PLOS ≤ 10 days), 152 (33.9%); group C (11 ≤ PLOS ≤ 14 days), 68 (15.1%); group D (PLOS > 14 days), 50 patients (11.1%). The main cause of prolonged PLOS in group B was minor complications (prolonged chest drainage, pulmonary infection, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury). Severely prolonged PLOS in groups C and D were due to major complications and comorbidities. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, open surgery, surgical duration >240 min, age >64 years, surgical complication grade >2, and critical comorbidities were identified as risk factors for delayed discharge. Conclusions: The optimal planned discharge time for patients undergoing esophagectomy with ERAS should be 7-10 days with a 4-day discharge observation window. Patients at risk of delayed discharge should be managed adopting PLOS prediction.

Indexed as

comorbiditiescomplicationsenhanced recovery after surgeryesophageal canceresophagectomypostoperative length of stay

Identifiers

PMID36793310
PMCPMC9922840
OpenAlexW4318459889

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.