Suppr超能文献

择期结直肠手术的机械性肠道准备

Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery.

作者信息

Guenaga Katia K F G, Matos Delcio, Wille-Jørgensen Peer

机构信息

Surgical Gastroenterology Department, Ferderal University of São Paulo, Marivaldo Fernandes, 152 apto. 13, Guarujá, São Paulo, Brazil, 11 440-050.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21(1):CD001544. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001544.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The presence of bowel contents during surgery has been related to anastomotic leakage, but the belief that mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is an efficient agent against leakage and infectious complications is based on observational data and expert opinions only.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the security and effectiveness of MBP on morbidity and mortality in colorectal surgery.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Publications describing trials of MBP before elective colorectal surgery were sought through searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and The Cochrane Library; by handsearching relevant medical journals and conference proceedings, and through personal communication with colleagues.Searches were performed March 13, 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including participants submitted for elective colorectal surgery. Eligible interventions included any type of MBP compared with no MBP. Primary outcomes included anastomosis leakage - both rectal and colonic - and combined figures. Secondary outcomes included mortality, peritonitis, reoperation, wound infection, extra-abdominal complications, and overall surgical site infections.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted and checked. The methodological quality of each trial was assessed. Details of randomisation, blinding, type of analysis, and number lost to follow up were recorded. For analysis, the Peto-Odds Ratio (OR) was used as the default (no statistical heterogeneity was observed).

MAIN RESULTS

Four new trials were included at this update (total 13 RCTs with 4777 participants; 2390 allocated to MBP (Group A), and 2387 to no preparation (Group B), before elective colorectal surgery) .Anastomotic leakage occurred:(i) in 10.0% (14/139) of Group A, compared with 6.6% (9/136) of Group B for low anterior resection; Peto OR 1.73 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.73 to 4.10).(ii) in 2.9% (32/1226) of Group A, compared with 2.5% (31/1228) of Group B for colonic surgery; Peto OR 1.13 (95% CI: 0.69 to 1.85). Overall anastomotic leakage occurred in 4.2% (102/2398) of Group A, compared with 3.4% (82/2378) of Group B; Peto OR 1.26 (95% CI: 0.941 to 1.69). Wound infection occurred in 9.6% (232/2417) of Group A, compared with 8.3% (200/2404) of Group B; Peto OR 1.19 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.45). Sensitivity analyses did not produce any differences in overall results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no statistically significant evidence that patients benefit from MBP. The belief that MBP is necessary before elective colorectal surgery should be reconsidered. Further research on patients submitted for elective colorectal surgery in whom bowel continuity is restored, with stratification for colonic and rectal surgery, is still warranted.

摘要

背景

手术期间肠道内容物的存在与吻合口漏有关,但认为机械性肠道准备(MBP)是预防吻合口漏和感染性并发症的有效措施这一观点仅基于观察性数据和专家意见。

目的

确定MBP对结直肠手术发病率和死亡率的安全性及有效性。

检索策略

通过检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、LILACS和考克兰图书馆,手工检索相关医学期刊和会议论文集,并与同事进行个人交流,查找描述择期结直肠手术前MBP试验的出版物。检索于2008年3月13日进行。

入选标准

随机对照试验(RCT),参与者为接受择期结直肠手术者。符合条件的干预措施包括任何类型的MBP与不进行MBP的比较。主要结局包括吻合口漏(直肠和结肠)及合并数据。次要结局包括死亡率、腹膜炎、再次手术、伤口感染、腹部外并发症及总体手术部位感染。

数据收集与分析

数据由独立人员提取并核对。评估每个试验的方法学质量。记录随机化、盲法、分析类型及失访人数的详细信息。分析时,采用Peto比值比(OR)作为默认值(未观察到统计学异质性)。

主要结果

本次更新纳入了4项新试验(共13项RCT,4777名参与者;择期结直肠手术前,2390名分配至MBP组(A组),2387名分配至未进行肠道准备组(B组))。吻合口漏发生率如下:(i)低位前切除术,A组为10.0%(14/139),B组为6.6%(9/136);Peto OR 1.73(95%置信区间(CI):0.73至4.10)。(ii)结肠手术,A组为2.9%(32/1226),B组为2.5%(31/1228);Peto OR 1.13(95% CI:0.69至1.85)。总体吻合口漏发生率,A组为4.2%(102/2398),B组为3.4%(82/2378);Peto OR 1.26(95% CI:0.941至1.69)。伤口感染发生率,A组为9.6%(232/2417),B组为8.3%(200/2404);Peto OR 1.19(95% CI:0.98至1.45)。敏感性分析未在总体结果中产生任何差异。

作者结论

没有统计学显著证据表明患者能从MBP中获益。应重新考虑择期结直肠手术前进行MBP是必要的这一观点。对于接受择期结直肠手术且肠道连续性得以恢复的患者,仍有必要进行进一步研究,并对结肠和直肠手术进行分层。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验