ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2026
Comparison of enhanced recovery after surgery and conventional anaesthesia techniques on post-operative recovery in patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries: A prospective randomised study.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is increasingly adopted in neuroanaesthesia, yet its application in endoscopic skull-base surgery remains unestablished. This prospective randomised study evaluated the effectiveness of ERAS in endoscopic skull-base surgeries. Methods: Sixty participants undergoing endoscopic skull-base surgery were randomised into either the ERAS group or the conventional anaesthetic technique (CAT) group. The primary objective was to compare the quality of post-operative recovery using the Quality of Recovery (QoR)-15 scoring system between the two groups at 24 hours post-operatively. The secondary objectives included comparing the days to ambulation, hospital stay, pain intensity, and patient satisfaction scores. Results: There was no significant difference in the mean QoR15 (± standard deviation) score between the groups [ERAS vs CAT, 98.40 ± 4.45 vs 96.56 ± 4.40, 95% confidence interval (-.45, 4.123), Conclusion: ERAS offers early ambulation, reduced immediate post-operative pain, and higher patient satisfaction compared to CAT in endoscopic skull-base surgeries. However, it shows no difference in post-operative recovery and overall hospital stay compared to CAT.
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.