ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery in older colorectal cancer patients in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery: is a "one-size-fits-all" strategy sufficient?
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) comprises a series of elements aimed at optimizing and standardizing perioperative care. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a modified enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol following colorectal surgery in older adults aged ≥ 65 years. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery at a tertiary referral hospital in Taiwan between 2018 and 2022 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into ERAS and traditional care groups according to the perioperative care strategy. The primary outcome was the short-term complication rate. However, the secondary outcomes were postoperative hospital stay, reoperation, readmission, and 30-day mortality rates.
resultsOverall, 1392 patients were enrolled, including 550 and 842 in the ERAS and traditional care groups, respectively. Demographic characteristics, including comorbidities, perioperative characteristics, and pathological staging, were not statistically significant. The patients' short-term complication rate was lower in the ERAS group (aged 65-80 years) than in the traditional care group (29 (7.2%) vs. 75 (11.5%), P = 0.026). However, the short-term complication rate did not differ between patients aged > 80 years (24 (16%) vs. 36 (19%), P = 0.438). In addition, the mean postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the ERAS group (7.5 ± 8.9 days vs 9.7 ± 10.0 days, P < 0.001). However, there were no differences in other secondary outcomes, including reoperation, readmission, and 30-day mortality rates.
conclusionMinimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery within the ERAS program is safe and effective in patients aged 65-80 years.
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.