AUTHOR=He Liping , Lu Lulu , Su Shengjie , Lin Qiang , Sheng Chan TITLE=Top 100 Most-Cited Articles on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualized Study JOURNAL=Frontiers in Surgery VOLUME=9 YEAR=2022 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/surgery/articles/10.3389/fsurg.2022.845946 DOI=10.3389/fsurg.2022.845946 ISSN=2296-875X ABSTRACT=Background

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is widely implemented in surgeries, and this study aims to reveal the characteristics of the 100 most-cited original articles in the field of ERAS research.

Methods

The literature was retrieved in the Web of Science database, the 100 most-cited original articles were identified, and their characteristics were analyzed, including the trends of publications and citations; contributions from countries, institutions, and authors; co-cited authors and journals in the references; served surgeries, research endpoints, keywords; and the level of evidence.

Results

There was a rising trend in the yearly publications and citations. Denmark and the USA contributed the largest number of highly cited papers. The University of Copenhagen was the most influential institution. Kehlet, Henrik was the most influential author. The British Journal of Surgery was the most often published and cited journal. ERAS protocols were overwhelmingly implemented in colorectal surgeries. The most focused endpoints were “length of stay”, “complications”, and “readmission”. The most frequently used keywords were “fast track”, “length of stay”, and “laparoscopy”. The keyword “enhanced recovery after surgery” burst since 2012. More than half of the highly cited articles presented level IV evidence, but there was no correlation between citations (densities) and the levels of evidence.

Conclusions

The highly cited research overwhelming implemented ERAS in colorectal surgeries, the “length of stay” was the most focused element, and Kehlet, Henrik was the most influential researcher. Most of the highly cited ERAS had low levels of evidence, and the total number of citations was not relevant to the level of evidence. Therefore, studies with high levels of evidence are still required in the future.