MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411969078 · doi:10.1016/j.surg.2025.109397

Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations 2025

2025· review· en· W4411969078 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgery · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontAlberta Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeColorectal surgeryGeneral surgeryElective surgerySurgeryIntensive care medicineAbdominal surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preoperative ERAS items Preadmission education and informationPreoperative education is a crucial component of ERAS care in colorectal surgery, but its wide variation makes comparing studies challenging.From 3,512 publications identified in the literature search, 10 met grading criteria, including 3 moderate-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).One RCT 9 found that tailored information for patients with rectal cancer reduced anxiety and improved satisfaction, especially 6 months after surgery.Another RCT 10 showed that virtual reality education significantly decreased anxiety and depression, enhancing patient satisfaction.A third RCT 11 reported that targeted preoperative ERAS and stoma education shortened hospital stays from 9 to 6 days, recommending early, repeated education by nurse specialists.Seven additional lowquality studies supported the value of focused educational interventions in varied contexts. Quality of evidence and recommendations.Recommendation: Preadmission education and information should be provided to all patients before surgery.Quality of evidence: Preadmission education and information.Quality of life: Moderate evidence for reduction in anxiety.Low evidence to support improvements to quality of life.Length of stay: Low evidence to correlate preadmission information as an independent component leading to reduction of LOS.Recommendation grade: Strong. Preoperative optimizationPreoperative optimization is complex, involving diverse interventions.It focuses on reducing risks and comorbidities before surgery while enhancing health through strategies such as alcohol cessation and physical training.Preoperative optimization can be divided into 6 key components. Identification of high-risk patients.There are several predictive tools that have been validated in colorectal surgery to identify patients at greatest risk for adverse outcomes.The evidence for specific tools is, however, weak.The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System 12 and the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Surgical Risk Calculator 13 are the tools with the best evidence in predicting outcomes from surgery.These platforms have been widely adopted globally, suggesting feasibility and acceptability. Quality of evidence and recommendations.Recommendation: Predictive tools should be used to identify high-risk patients before colorectal surgery to optimize perioperative planning and preparation.Quality of evidence: Using predictive tools.Mortality: Very low.Complications: Very low

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it