SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2025
Enhanced recovery after surgery or fast-track surgery and the perioperative period of acute gastrointestinal perforation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observation of the impact of applying the fast track surgery concept during the perioperative period of breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer on the effectiveness of patient care and complications.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Effects of multimodal nursing intervention with health education on recovery, pain, and psychological outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reports of an association between enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) or fast-track surgery (FTS) and the perioperative period of acute gastrointestinal perforation are inconsistent. Therefore, we systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of ERAS or FTS in the perioperative of acute gastrointestinal perforation. Methods: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) or controlled clinical trial (CCT) on the application of ERAS/FTS in the perioperative management of acute gastrointestinal perforation was conducted by PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Ovid, Elsevier ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Wanfang Data, and WHIP. The methodology quality and data extraction were evaluated by two researchers, and meta-analysis was performed by Stata 11 software. Results: A total of 20 RCTs and 7 CCTs were included in the study, involving 1,864 patients-917 in the ERAS/FTS group and 947 in the control group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the stress response CRP and complication rate of the ERAS/FTS group were significantly lower than those of the traditional treatment group, the time of first out-of-bed activity and the time of postoperative first exhaust and eating were advanced, and the cost and the length of hospital stay were decreased ( Conclusion: The application of ERAS/FTS in perioperative management of acute gastrointestinal perforation is safe and effective.
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.