SynthesisPediatric surgery international2025
Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols for the perioperative management of pediatric cleft lip and palate surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for cleft lip and palate surgery in pediatric patients. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Scopus, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies (CS) from January 1, 2014, to August 31, 2024, to evaluate the impact of the safety and efficacy of ERAS protocols. The PRISMA statement was followed when conducting the systematic review. Review Manager 5.4 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. A total of 17 studies involving 1870 patients were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis results revealed that, compared to the control group, the ERAS group exhibited a shorter length of stay (95%CI:3.22, -1.58, p<0.01), a lower incidence of complications (95%CI:0.14, 0.32, p<0.01), reduced postoperative opioid usage (95%CI:-0.66,-0.25, p<0.01), shorter time to initiate oral intake (95%CI:-7.08, -1.82, p<0.01), reduced postoperative pain assessments (95%CI:-1.43,-1.18, p<0.01) and elevated patient satisfaction (95%CI:2.00,11.23, p<0.01). All these differences were statistically significant, highlighting the efficacy of the ERAS protocol in enhancing postoperative recovery. The perioperative application of the ERAS concept in patients with cleft lip and palate has better efficacy and safety than the traditional concept, and it can shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce postoperative complications, reduce the dose of anaesthetics, relieve pain, advance the time of the first oral intake and accelerate the patient's recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40394284What 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.