Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40696568›Full record

GuidelineWorld journal of surgery2025

Guidelines for Enhanced Recovery After Trauma and Intensive Care (ERATIC): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and International Association for Trauma Surgery and Intensive Care (IATSIC) Society Recommendations: Paper 2: Postoperative and Intensive Care Recommendations.

Timothy C Hardcastle, Christine Gaarder, Zsolt Balogh, Scott D'amours, Kimberly A Davis, Amit Gupta, Shahin Mohseni, Paal A Naess, Shanisa Naidoo, Tarek Razek and 5 more

Abstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in World journal of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

15 authors.

Timothy C HardcastleInkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3967-0234
Christine GaarderOslo University Hospital Ulleval and University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9485-1783
Zsolt BaloghJohn Hunter Hospital and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0277-4822
Scott D'amoursLiverpool Hospital and University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4975-7984
Kimberly A DavisDivision of General Surgery, Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5660-5293
Amit GuptaJPN Apex Trauma Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8912-0647
Shahin MohseniDepartment of Surgery, New Al Jahra Hospital, Al Jahra, Kuwait.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7097-487X
Paal A NaessOslo University Hospital Ulleval and University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8021-4540
Shanisa NaidooDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3356-3163
Tarek RazekMontreal University Hospital and McGill University, Montreal, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4159-4370
Simon RobertsonCanberra Hospital, Canberra, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1712-5004
Hayaki UchinoMontreal University Hospital and McGill University, Montreal, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2898-2857
David ZoniesDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8411-6187
Jade WhingNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1207-8693
Michael J ScottDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3643-3505

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications, and costs for elective surgical procedures. It remains challenging to implement ERAS concepts in the acute trauma patient due to deranged physiological reserve from the penetrating or blunt trauma producing altered physiology. However, systems of care improve access to early intervention and potentially reduce mortality. These consensus guidelines examine optimal prehospital, resuscitation-room, intraoperative and postoperative treatment, systems of ethical management, and overall care for trauma patients in the postresuscitation phase of care. The guideline is presented in three parts, this being Part 2.

methodsExperts in aspects of management of trauma surgical patients and intensive care were invited to contribute by the International ERAS Society and IATSIC. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements using the patient, intervention, comparator outcome (PICO) consensus questions created by the expert group. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies; reviewed and summarized recommendations were graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. These recommendations based on current best evidence, with extrapolation from elective patient studies, where appropriate, were followed by a modified two-round Delphi method to validate final recommendations. Several ERAS components are already standard of care within national and society guidelines and are endorsed. The bulk of the text focuses on key areas pertaining specifically to trauma care of major trauma and polytrauma in the ICU-requiring group.

resultsOverall, 37 aspects of trauma care were considered, with multiple PICO questions and subpoints. Consensus was reached after two rounds of a modified Delphi process involving all authors, with minor adjustments to some phrasing required, but with 87% overall agreement on all statements (100% agreement on 31 of the main statement sets, prior to minor edits to address the points of difference for the rest, with 100% total agreement thereafter). None were rejected outright. The recommendations and level of evidence for each aspect of trauma care that may impact on improved recovery and reduced length of hospital stay are presented with grade of recommendation.

conclusionsThis paper presents the results of the postoperative care and ICU aspects. The guidelines are based on current best evidence for an ERAS approach to patients who have had major injuries and polytrauma. These guidelines are not exhaustive but collate the best available evidence on important components of care for this patient population. As some of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery and nontrauma emergency surgery, some of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Indexed as

Critical CareEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryPostoperative CareWounds and InjuriesAcute Care SurgeryHumansLength of StaySocieties, Medicalenhanced recovery after surgeryERASmajor traumaperioperative carepolytrauma

Identifiers

PMID40696568
PMCPMC12338449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.