Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40072360›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025

Effectiveness of ERAS program on postoperative recovery after gastric cancer surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

Ho-Jin Lee, Jeesun Kim, Soo-Hyuk Yoon, Seong-Ho Kong, Won Ho Kim, Do Joong Park, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Han-Kwang Yang

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06984952 (Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06984952 narecruitingnot on this map

Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) on Postoperative Recovery After Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy: A Multi-center Open-labeled Randomized Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorSeoul National University HospitalRan2025 to 2029Enrolled308ConditionsEnhanced Recovery After Surgery, Gastrectomy for Gastric CancerArmsERAS protocol
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ho-Jin LeeDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7134-5044
Jeesun KimDepartment of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Soo-Hyuk YoonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8484-5777
Seong-Ho KongDepartment of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Won Ho KimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Do Joong ParkDepartment of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9644-6127
Hyuk-Joon LeeDepartment of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7134-5044
Han-Kwang YangDepartment of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have reported the effectiveness of the "enhanced recovery after surgery" program in patients who underwent gastric cancer surgery, mostly based on the 2014 gastrectomy guidelines. Therefore, based on subsequent advancements in perioperative management, this randomized, controlled, open-label, single-center study aimed to assess the impact of a recent evidence-based multimodal enhanced recovery after surgery program on the quality of early recovery after gastric cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included adult patients scheduled to undergo elective laparoscopic or robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to the enhanced recovery after surgery or conventional group. The primary outcome was the total Quality of Recovery-15 score assessed 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. Differences between both groups were evaluated using a linear mixed-effects model. We hypothesized that an increase of at least 8 points in the Korean version of Quality of Recovery-15 scores would indicate a clinically significant improvement, consistent with the minimal clinically important difference (≥8) for Quality of Recovery-15. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at rest and during coughing, cumulative fentanyl consumption through intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, postoperative nausea/vomiting incidence, and gastrointestinal dysfunction as measured using the I-FEED score - all assessed 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively.

resultsFor the 92 patients examined (enhanced recovery after surgery, n = 45; conventional, n = 47), the estimated difference in the postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 total scores between the two groups during the first days was significantly larger than the minimal clinically important difference of Quality of Recovery-15 (mean difference: 16.0, 95% confidence interval: 8.9-23.0, P < 0.001). Furthermore, excluding the incidence of postoperative nausea/vomiting, the enhanced recovery after surgery group demonstrated significant improvements in other secondary outcomes.

conclusionsOur evidence-based multimodal enhanced recovery after surgery program significantly improved the quality of early postoperative recovery after minimally invasive distal gastrectomy.

Indexed as

Enhanced Recovery After SurgeryGastrectomyStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainRecovery of FunctionRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment Outcomeenhanced recovery after surgerygastrectomypainperioperative careperioperative medicinepostoperativestomach neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID40072360
PMCPMC12165489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.