SynthesisFrontiers in public health2026
Effects of enhanced recovery after surgery and prehabilitation interventions on postoperative outcomes after lung resection in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lung resection is the standard curative treatment for resectable lung cancer; however, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) remain major barriers to recovery and healthcare efficiency. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and prehabilitation are distinct perioperative strategies that differ in their timing, intervention components, and mechanisms of action, but both aim to optimize patients' perioperative condition and improve postoperative recovery. However, their effectiveness compared with conventional perioperative care based solely on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has not been comprehensively synthesized. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of ERAS and prehabilitation in reducing PPCs, shortening LOS, and improving patient-reported outcomes following pulmonary resection for lung cancer. Subjects and methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs involving adults undergoing pulmonary resection for primary lung cancer. Searches of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL Complete, RISS, KISS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform identified studies published between January 2015 and May 2026. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Random-effects meta-analyses estimated pooled odds ratios (ORs) for PPCs and mean differences (MDs) for LOS. Patient-reported outcomes were synthesized narratively according to the SWiM guideline. Results: Ten RCTs involving 1,569 participants met the inclusion criteria. ERAS and prehabilitation significantly reduced PPCs compared with conventional perioperative care (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.36-0.65, Conclusion: ERAS and prehabilitation are effective perioperative strategies for improving outcomes after pulmonary resection for lung cancer. Their implementation in routine clinical practice may reduce postoperative complications, accelerate recovery, and improve healthcare efficiency. Further multicenter RCTs are needed to optimize intervention components, standardize outcome measures, and strengthen evidence for long-term and patient-reported outcomes. Systematic review registration: CRD420261373242.
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.