The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized clinical trial on enhanced recovery versus standard care following open liver resection
Open accessAbstract
Background: Enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) have been shown to reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and complications in colorectal surgery. Whether ERPs have the same benefits in open liver resection surgery is unclear, and randomized clinical trials are lacking. Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for open liver resection were randomized to an ERP group or standard care. Primary endpoints were time until medically fit for discharge (MFD) and LOS. Secondary endpoints were postoperative morbidity, pain scores, readmission rate, mortality, quality of life (QoL) and patient satisfaction. ERP elements included greater preoperative education, preoperative oral carbohydrate loading, postoperative goal-directed fluid therapy, early mobilization and physiotherapy. Both groups received standardized anaesthesia with epidural analgesia. Results: The analysis included 46 patients in the ERP group and 45 in the standard care group. Median MFD time was reduced in the ERP group (3 days versus 6 days with standard care; P < 0·001), as was LOS (4 days versus 7 days; P < 0·001). The ERP significantly reduced the rate of medical complications (7 versus 27 per cent; P = 0·020), but not surgical complications (15 versus 11 per cent; P = 0·612), readmissions (4 versus 0 per cent; P = 0·153) or mortality (both 2 per cent; P = 0·987). QoL over 28 days was significantly better in the ERP group (P = 0·002). There was no difference in patient satisfaction. Conclusion: ERPs for open liver resection surgery are safe and effective. Patients treated in the ERP recovered faster, were discharged sooner, and had fewer medical-related complications and improved QoL. Registration number: ISRCTN03274575 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dindo, D., Demartines, N., & Clavien, P.-A. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae · Cited by 31,378
EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life
(1990) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9 · Cited by 15,736
Nygren, J., Thacker, J., Carli, F., Fearon, K. C. H., Norderval, S., Lobo, D. N., Ljungqvist, O., Soop, M., & Ramirez, J. (2013) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1787-6 · Cited by 2,171
Khuri, S. F., Henderson, W. G., DePalma, R. G., Mosca, C., Healey, N. A., & Kumbhani, D. J. (2005) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000179621.33268.83 · Cited by 1,452
Varadhan, K. K., Neal, K. R., Dejong, C. H. C., Fearon, K. C. H., Ljungqvist, O., & Lobo, D. N. (2010) · Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2010.01.004 · Cited by 1,182
Gustafsson, U. O., Scott, M. J., Schwenk, W., Demartines, N., Roulin, D., Francis, N., McNaught, C. E., MacFie, J., Liberman, A. S., Soop, M., et al. (2013) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1772-0 · Cited by 1,082
Self-citationGustafsson, U. O. (2011) · Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1001/archsurg.2010.309 · Cited by 936
Vlug, M. S., Wind, J., Hollmann, M. W., Ubbink, D. T., Cense, H. A., Engel, A. F., Gerhards, M. F., van Wagensveld, B. A., van der Zaag, E. S., van Geloven, A. A. W., et al. (2011) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31821fd1ce · Cited by 757
Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery
Spanjersberg, W. R., Reurings, J., Keus, F., & van Laarhoven, C. J. (2011) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007635.pub2 · Cited by 735
Pearse, R., Dawson, D., Fawcett, J., Rhodes, A., Grounds, R. M., & Bennett, E. D. (2005) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc3887 · Cited by 698
Cited by
Dort, J. C., Farwell, D. G., Findlay, M., Huber, G. F., Kerr, P., Shea-Budgell, M. A., Simon, C., Uppington, J., Zygun, D., Ljungqvist, O., et al. (2017) · JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2016.2981 · Cited by 527
Temple-Oberle, C., Shea-Budgell, M. A., Tan, M., Semple, J. L., Schrag, C., Barreto, M., Blondeel, P., Hamming, J., Dayan, J., & Ljungqvist, O. (2017) · Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000003242 · Cited by 361
Joliat, G., Kobayashi, K., Hasegawa, K., Thomson, J., Padbury, R., Scott, M., Brustia, R., Scatton, O., Tran Cao, H. S., Vauthey, J., et al. (2023) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-022-06732-5 · Cited by 330
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, C., Kelliher, L., Dickinson, M., Riga, A., Worthington, T., Scott, M. J., Vandrevala, T., Fry, C. H., Karanjia, N., & Quiney, N.
- Venue
- British Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-05-21
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1015-1024
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W1841880474
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 29.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized clinical trial on enhanced recovery versus standard care following open liver resection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bjs.9165
- The paper
- Jones, C., Kelliher, L., Dickinson, M., Riga, A., Worthington, T., Scott, M. J., Vandrevala, T., Fry, C. H., Karanjia, N., & Quiney, N. (2013). Randomized clinical trial on enhanced recovery versus standard care following open liver resection. British Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9165
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
