ArticleBMC surgery2025
Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol optimizes results and cost of laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. 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.
- Application of an ERAS-based care bundle strategy in early rehabilitation care of patients with acute ischemic stroke.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Trial
- A novel one-position versus conventional surgical approach for the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a multicenter cohort study based in western China.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Identifying the Need for Prehabilitation in Cancer Patients Undergoing Nephrectomy or Nephroureterectomy.Cancers · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the efficacy of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) strategy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LRNU).
methods90 patients who received LRNU at Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University between January 2018 and July 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, including 43 in the ERAS group and 47 in the pre-ERAS group. The clinical features, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and hospital expenditures of the two groups were compared via t-test, Mann-Whitney test, and Chi-square test.
resultsIn comparison to the pre-ERAS group, the total and postoperative LOS were significantly shorter in the ERAS group [total LOS: 15.0 (13.0-20.0) vs. 21.0 (16.0-26.0), p < 0.001; postoperative LOS: 8.0 (7.0-9.0) vs. 11.0 (9.0-13.0), p < 0.001]. The ERAS group had lower hospitalization costs than that in the pre-ERAS group [56896.40 (48324.30-67498.01) vs. 64249.83 (55574.36-81581.82), p = 0.010]. Additionally, the ERAS group experienced a reduction in postoperative fever incidence (23.4% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.011).
conclusionsIn the realm of LRNU, ERAS protocols are safe and practical for minimizing the LOS while accelerating the rehabilitation of patients undergoing LRNU. This study offers insights for enhancing ERAS protocols for UTUC patients even further.
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.