ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2024
Enhanced recovery after chest wall resection and reconstruction: a clinical practice review.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- How to Operate on a Huge Intrathoracic Mass? A Practical New Classification and a Special Innovative Surgical Method for the Operation of Huge Intrathoracic Masses.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Full-Thickness Chest Wall Resection and Reconstruction for Locally Invasive Phyllodes Tumors: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Impact of pleural reconstruction on postoperative outcomes in rib tumor resection: a decade-long retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the late 1990s, and Henrik Kehlet's hypothesis that a reduction of the body's stress response to major surgeries could decrease postoperative morbidity, "Enhanced Recovery After Surgery" (ERAS) care pathways have been streamlined. They are now well accepted and considered standard in many surgical disciplines. Yet, to this day, there is no specific ERAS protocol for chest wall resections (CWRs), the removal of a full-thickness portion of the chest wall, including muscle, bone and possibly skin. This is most unfortunate because these are high-risk surgeries, which carry high morbidity rates. In this review, we propose an overview of the current key elements of the ERAS guidelines for thoracic surgery that might apply to CWRs. A successful ERAS pathway for CWR patients would entail, as is the standard approach, three parts: pre-, peri- and postoperative elements. Preoperative items would include specific information, targeted patient education, involvement of all members of the team, including the plastic surgeons, smoking cessation, dedicated nutrition and carbohydrate loading. Perioperative items would likely be standard for thoracotomy patients, namely carefully selective pre-anesthesia sedative medication only in some rare instances, low-molecular-weight heparin throughout, antibiotic prophylaxis, minimization of postoperative nausea and vomiting, avoidance of fluid overload and of urinary drainage. Postoperative elements would include early mobilization and feeding, swift discontinuation of intravenous fluid supply and chest tube removal as soon as safe. Optimal pain management throughout also appears to be critical to minimize the risk of respiratory complications. Together, all these items are achievable and may hold the key to successful introduction of ERAS pathways to the benefit of CWR patients.
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.