ReviewCureus2025
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Versus Conventional Care in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing the adequacy of funding for robotic-surgery hospital stays: a focused cost analysis based on 1,722 procedures in a French university hospital.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
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
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have gained prominence in colorectal surgery as a means to improve patient outcomes and reduce postoperative recovery time. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of ERAS protocols compared to conventional perioperative care, focusing on postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay (LOS). A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 2024. Studies included adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery and reported on LOS and postoperative complications. Three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Two trials demonstrated statistically significant reductions in LOS in ERAS groups compared to controls (p = 0.001 and p = 0.021), while the third reported no significant difference but affirmed ERAS safety. None of the studies showed increased morbidity, readmission rates, or mortality associated with ERAS protocols. ERAS protocols are a safe and effective alternative to conventional perioperative care in colorectal surgery. They are consistently associated with reduced hospital stay and comparable complication rates, supporting their broader implementation to enhance recovery and healthcare efficiency.
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.