Cochrane · systematic review · CD011382
Enhanced recovery protocols for major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery
Bond‐Smith, G, Belgaumkar, AP, Davidson, BR, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
GutAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
9
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 5 · 55.6%Low 4 · 44.4%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Enhanced recovery protocol versus standard care for major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery
Population: people with major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Short‐term mortality Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | RR 2.79 [0.44, 17.73] | 7 studies · 868 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Serious adverse events (proportion) Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | RR 5.57 [0.68, 45.89] | 2 studies · 341 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Serious adverse events (number) Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | Rate ratio 0.72 [0.45, 1.13] | 7 studies · 859 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life (until 3 months) Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 373 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mild adverse events (proportion) Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | RR 0.58 [0.39, 0.85] | 4 studies · 525 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mild adverse events (number) Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | Rate ratio 0.52 [0.39, 0.7] | 9 studies · 1014 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Length of hospital stay Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 1014 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Readmissions Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | RR 1.4 [0.69, 2.87] | 7 studies · 733 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Costs Enhanced recovery protocol vs standard care | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 282 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |