ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
The effect of enhanced recovery after surgery in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
backgroundThe enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol has been demonstrated to improve patient outcomes; however, its efficacy has not been prospectively evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for patients undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). This study aimed to develop a multidisciplinary ERAS protocol specifically for LSC and to systematically evaluate its clinical efficacy and benefits following implementation. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective RCT conducted between September 2023 and February 2024, 80 patients undergoing LSC were randomized to either ERAS protocol (Group E) or conventional perioperative care (Group C). Primary outcomes included postoperative length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs, with secondary outcomes assessing recovery parameters, complication rates, pain scores, vital signs, and laboratory markers.
resultsImplementation of the ERAS protocol significantly reduced median postoperative LOS [77.00 (69.00-87.00) h vs. 46.50 (40.00-50.00) h; median difference: 31.00 h, 95% CI: 26.00-36.00; P < 0.001]. The ERAS group showed statistically significant improvements in multiple recovery metrics: earlier urinary catheter removal (median reduction 12 hours), quicker resumption of oral intake (18 hours), faster return of bowel function (8 hours), and earlier ambulation (4 hours) (all P < 0.001). Group E exhibited significantly improved 7-day QoR-15 scores (P = 0.002), reduced pain scores, decreased opioid use, lower postoperative white blood cell counts, and fewer episodes of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The 30-day readmission and emergency department visit rates in both group were zero.
conclusionThis RCT establishes that implementation of an ERAS protocol for LSC significantly enhances postoperative recovery, reduces pain and complications, decreases opioid use while attenuating surgical stress responses. The 40.26% reduction in (LOS) meets the minimum clinically important difference threshold, indicating a clinically meaningful improvement. Additionally, the 30-day readmission and ED visit rates remained zero, further confirming the safety of the ERAS protocol in low-risk women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.