SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2026
Enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease to reduce hospital length of stay: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 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.
- Enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease to reduce hospital length of stay: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) improves outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery; however, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have been relatively excluded from these analyses. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of ERAS protocols in adult patients with IBD.
methodsRelevant databases were searched for randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled observational studies that assessed ERAS protocols versus conventional care in adult patients with IBD, in any language until July 21, 2025. Two authors independently identified trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias (ROB 2.0 and ROBINS-I) and evidence certainty (GRADE). Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions, re-operations and complications.
resultsEighteen studies (one RCT, 17 observational) were included. LOS was significantly lower in the ERAS group (mean difference: -1.62 days; 95% CI: -2.03, -1.21, 15 studies, 4225 patients, moderate certainty). There was no difference in 30-day readmissions (odds ratio, OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.62, 1.12, 15 studies, 4157 patients, low certainty), 30-day reoperations (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.46, 1.02, 8 studies, 2161 patients, very low certainty), or 30-day complications (OR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.08, 14 studies, 4074 patients, low certainty). Evidence certainty was limited by non-blinding, and observational data at serious risk of bias.
conclusionsERAS for patients with IBD reduces LOS with no difference in 30-day readmissions, reoperations and complications. Subgroup analyses generated the hypothesis that procedure-specific ERAS pathways incorporating greater preoperative optimisation may provide additional benefit, but this requires confirmation in adequately powered randomised trials.
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.