SynthesisUpdates in surgery2025
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in stoma reversal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols on mortality and morbidity after trauma and non-trauma emergency laparotomies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Safety and feasibility of early discharge (≤ 23 h) following loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Pooled it
- Ileostomy closure at an ambulatory surgery center: an initial assessment of feasibility and safety.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Comment on: "Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in stoma reversal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis".Updates in 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stoma reversal surgery is known for relatively high complication rates. While Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are extensively validated for colorectal surgery, their use in stoma reversal remains underexplored. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols compared to standard care (SC) practices. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for studies that compared clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols versus SC practices. The endpoints of interest were length of stay (LOS), ileus, wound infection, anastomotic leak, time to first stool, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, and reoperation rates. Mean difference (MD) was calculated for continuous variables and Odds Ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables. Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.4.0. We included eight studies comprising 1322 patients. Among these, 603 (45.6%) followed an ERAS protocol, while 719 (54.4%) received SC practices. ERAS was associated with a significant decrease in LOS (MD -1.83; 95% CI -2.55 to -1.12; p < 0.01), wound infection (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97; p = 0.041), and time to first stool (MD -1.02; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.81; p < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding ileus, anastomotic leak, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, or reoperation rates. The implementation of ERAS protocols in stoma reversal procedures should be considered, as it was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without increasing morbidity, and may even reduce complications such as wound infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39799533What 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.