We have located links that may give you full text access.
Is recovery enhancement after gastric cancer surgery really a safe approach for elderly patients?
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology 2024 April 16
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in elderly patients with gastric cancer (GC).
AIM: To evaluate the safety of ERAS in elderly patients with GC.
METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies from inception to April 1, 2023. The mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were pooled for analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores. We used Stata (V.16.0) software for data analysis.
RESULTS: This study consists of six studies involving 878 elderly patients. By analyzing the clinical outcomes, we found that the ERAS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -0.51, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.72 to -0.30, P = 0.00); earlier times to first flatus (defecation; MD = -0.30, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.55 to -0.06, P = 0.02); less intestinal obstruction (OR = 3.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.07 to 9.78, P = 0.04); less nausea and vomiting (OR = 4.07, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.29 to 12.84, P = 0.02); and less gastric retention (OR = 5.69, I 2 = 2.46%, 95%CI = 2.00 to 16.20, P = 0.00). Our results showed that the conventional group had a greater mortality rate than the ERAS group (OR = 0.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.07 to 0.84, P = 0.03). However, there was no statistically significant difference in major complications between the ERAS group and the conventional group (OR = 0.67, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.38 to 1.18, P = 0.16).
CONCLUSION: Compared to those with conventional recovery, elderly GC patients who received the ERAS protocol after surgery had a lower risk of mortality.
AIM: To evaluate the safety of ERAS in elderly patients with GC.
METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies from inception to April 1, 2023. The mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were pooled for analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores. We used Stata (V.16.0) software for data analysis.
RESULTS: This study consists of six studies involving 878 elderly patients. By analyzing the clinical outcomes, we found that the ERAS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -0.51, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.72 to -0.30, P = 0.00); earlier times to first flatus (defecation; MD = -0.30, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.55 to -0.06, P = 0.02); less intestinal obstruction (OR = 3.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.07 to 9.78, P = 0.04); less nausea and vomiting (OR = 4.07, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.29 to 12.84, P = 0.02); and less gastric retention (OR = 5.69, I 2 = 2.46%, 95%CI = 2.00 to 16.20, P = 0.00). Our results showed that the conventional group had a greater mortality rate than the ERAS group (OR = 0.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.07 to 0.84, P = 0.03). However, there was no statistically significant difference in major complications between the ERAS group and the conventional group (OR = 0.67, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.38 to 1.18, P = 0.16).
CONCLUSION: Compared to those with conventional recovery, elderly GC patients who received the ERAS protocol after surgery had a lower risk of mortality.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app