FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2891260057> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2891260057 abstract "Abstract Background ERAS protocol for esophageal surgeries has gained recognition in the past decade with reported benefits of shortened hospital stay, quick recovery of function, improved quality of life, lower morbidity, and reduced overall cost. A meta-analysis was conducted to establish weighted-pooled analysis of current literature comparing ERAS protocol against standard management following esophageal resection. Methods A systematic search of literature databases was completed from January-1990 to January-2018 using predetermined keywords. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sample size of > 30 patients in each arm and with overlapping ERAS protocols. Primary outcome variables were mean hospital stay (days), mean time to passage of flatus (hours), bowel motion (days), and rate of anastomotic leak. Secondary outcome variables were cardiac arrhythmia, pulmonary complications and overall morbidity. Mean difference (MD) for continuous variables and Odds ratio (OR) or Risk Difference (RD) for dichotomous variables with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistics and χ2 Q-test. Random effect model was used for substantial heterogeneity (I2 > 40% or P < 0.10) and otherwise, fixed effect model was used. Results Three RCTs were identified with a total of 358 patients (179 in each group). Hospital stay [MD = 4.47(95%CI = 2.39–6.55; P < 0.00001; I2 = 98%)] and time to passage of first flatus [MD = 20.56(95%CI = 1.05–40.07; P < 0.00001; I2 = 99%)] were reported by all three studies and pooled analysis favored ERAS group with substantial heterogeneity. Time to first bowel motion significantly favored the ERAS group with the least heterogeneity [MD = 1.36(95%CI = 0.94–1.78; P = 0.63; I2 = 0%)]. All dichotomous variables showed minimal between-study heterogeneity. ERAS group showed better outcome with regards to overall morbidity [RD = 0.10(95%CI = 0.03–0.18; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%)], pulmonary complications [OR = 0.26(95%CI = 0.10–0.63; P = 0.91; I2 = 0%)] and rate of anastomotic leak [OR = 0.12(95% CI = 0.01–0.94; P = 0.47; I2 = 0%)]. There was no difference between the two groups for cardiac arrhythmias [OR = 0.77(95% CI = 0.19–3.18; P = 0.32; I2 = 0%)]. Other outcome variables of interest, including quality of life, patient satisfaction, hospital cost, and in-hospital or 30-day mortality were inadequately reported by studies to be amenable to pooled analysis. Conclusion ERAS protocol shows significant improvement in post-operative recovery and lower complication rates as compared with standard management, without any increase in anastomotic leak rate. However, variability and discrepancy in protocols followed by different institutions is noteworthy. Establishment of standardized ERAS protocols is warranted. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest." @default.
• W2891260057 created "2018-09-27" @default.
• W2891260057 creator A5014642479 @default.
• W2891260057 creator A5054751430 @default.
• W2891260057 creator A5056416573 @default.
• W2891260057 creator A5059584965 @default.
• W2891260057 date "2018-09-01" @default.
• W2891260057 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2891260057 title "RA02.04: UTILIZATION OF ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY (ERAS) PROTOCOL IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ESOPHAGEAL RESECTION: META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS" @default.
• W2891260057 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doy089.ra02.04" @default.
• W2891260057 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2891260057 type Work @default.
• W2891260057 sameAs 2891260057 @default.
• W2891260057 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2891260057 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2891260057 hasAuthorship W2891260057A5014642479 @default.
• W2891260057 hasAuthorship W2891260057A5054751430 @default.
• W2891260057 hasAuthorship W2891260057A5056416573 @default.
• W2891260057 hasAuthorship W2891260057A5059584965 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C119423318 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C129848803 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C156957248 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C105795698 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C119423318 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C126322002 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C129848803 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C141071460 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C156957248 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C168563851 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C33923547 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C44249647 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C71924100 @default.
• W2891260057 hasConceptScore W2891260057C95190672 @default.
• W2891260057 hasLocation W28912600571 @default.
• W2891260057 hasOpenAccess W2891260057 @default.
• W2891260057 hasPrimaryLocation W28912600571 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2005059776 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2328967333 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2353164399 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2362792357 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2364680552 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2764150012 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W2911633027 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W3009124764 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W4229927750 @default.
• W2891260057 hasRelatedWork W969602140 @default.
• W2891260057 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2891260057 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2891260057 magId "2891260057" @default.
• W2891260057 workType "article" @default.