ArticleScientific reports2024
Morbidity after accelerated enhanced recovery protocol for colon cancer surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accelerated enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery with early discharge: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- A cost comparison between patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery with and without a clinical pathway.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- The impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on safety and long-term survival in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies showed that accelerated enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) with discharge 1-3 days after colorectal surgery are feasible for specific patients without compromising patients' safety. This study aimed to examine the incidence, severity, and treatment of complications after treatment according to an accelerated ERP (CHASE). This accelerated ERP consisted of adjustments in pre-, peri- and postoperative care. Patients treated according to the CHASE protocol were compared to a retrospective cohort of patients who received standard ERAS care. The primary outcome was the rate of severe complications. The overall complication rates were similar in both cohorts (CHASE 30.7% vs ERAS 31.4%, p = 0.958) as well as severe complications (CHASE 20.9% vs ERAS 21.4%, p = 0.950). Among the 113 patients with a complicated course, the readmission rate was significantly higher in the CHASE cohort (41.9% vs 21.4%, p = 0.020). LOS after readmission was longer in the CHASE cohort (p = 0.018), but the total LOS was shorter (4 versus 6 days, p = 0.001). This study demonstrates that accelerated recovery can be safe for ASA I-II patients and has the potential to become a standard of care. Moreover, the CHASE protocol proved to be beneficial in terms of total LOS for patients with complications.
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.