ArticleCureus2023
Impact of Tailored-Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Versus Conventional Care in Patients of Gastro-Duodenal Perforation: A Pilot Randomized Control Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and Surgical Site Infections (SSIs).Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Risk stratification of residual abscess after surgical treatment for gastroduodenal perforation.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program established improved clinical outcomes in elective surgery; however, its role in emergencies is uncertain. This study was designed to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a tailored-ERAS (t-ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing modified Graham's patch closure for gastro-duodenal perforation.
methodsA single-centre, prospective, parallel-arm, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted from February 2021 to December 2021. Patients with gastroduodenal perforation undergoing modified Graham's patch were randomly assigned to either conventional care or the t-ERAS pathway. Patients with refractory septic shock, psychiatric or neurological disorders, pregnancy, multiple perforations, sealed-off perforations, and perforation sizes greater than 1.5 cm were excluded. The primary outcome was to compare the length of hospitalization (LOH). Functional recovery parameters and morbidity were compared in secondary outcomes.
resultsTwenty-five patients each were included in conventional care and the t-ERAS group. In the t-ERAS group, LOH was significantly shorter (6.3 SD2.15 days versus 9.56 SD4.33 days, p = 0.001). Patients in the t-ERAS group had significantly early functional recovery (days) with time to first bowel sound (1.8 SD0.41; p 0.002), first flatus (2.52 SD0.65; p = 0.026), first stool (3.04 SD0.68; p < 0.001), first liquid diet (2.24 SD0.60; p = 0.002), and duration of ileus (2.64 SD0.86; p = 0.038). There was no significant difference in morbidity such as post-operative nausea and vomiting, SSI, or pulmonary complications between the two groups.
conclusionTailored ERAS pathways are safe and effective in reducing the LOH and promoting early functional recovery in patients undergoing emergency closure of gastro-duodenal perforation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.