Suppr超能文献

口服抗生素准备在择期结直肠手术中的作用:一项荟萃分析。

The Role of Oral Antibiotic Preparation in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Gastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.

MRC/ARUK Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.

出版信息

Ann Surg. 2019 Jul;270(1):43-58. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003145.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the impact of the use of oral antibiotics (OAB) with or without mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on outcome in elective colorectal surgery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Meta-analyses have demonstrated that MBP does not impact upon postoperative morbidity or mortality, and as such it should not be prescribed routinely. However, recent evidence from large retrospective cohort and database studies has suggested that there may be a role for combined OAB and MBP, or OAB alone in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI).

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies including adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, receiving OAB with or without MBP was performed. The outcome measures examined were SSI, anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, development of ileus, reoperation and Clostridium difficile infection.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies with 69,517 patients (28 randomized controlled trials, n = 6437 and 12 cohort studies, n = 63,080) were included. The combination of MBP+OAB versus MBP alone was associated with a significant reduction in SSI [risk ratio (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.56, P < 0.00001, I = 13%], anastomotic leak (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.70, P < 0.00001, I = 0%), 30-day mortality (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.76, P < 0.0001, I = 0%), overall morbidity (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63-0.71, P < 0.00001, I = 0%), and development of ileus (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.98, P = 0.04, I = 36%), with no difference in Clostridium difficile infection rates. When a combination of MBP+OAB was compared with OAB alone, no significant difference was seen in SSI or anastomotic leak rates, but there was a significant reduction in 30-day mortality, and incidence of postoperative ileus with the combination. There is minimal literature available on the comparison between combined MBP+OAB versus no preparation, OAB alone versus no preparation, and OAB versus MBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests a potentially significant role for OAB preparation, either in combination with MBP or alone, in the prevention of postoperative complications in elective colorectal surgery. Further high-quality evidence is required to differentiate between the benefits of combined MBP+OAB or OAB alone.

摘要

目的

比较口服抗生素(OAB)联合或不联合机械肠道准备(MBP)对择期结直肠手术结局的影响。

背景资料概要

荟萃分析表明,MBP 并不影响术后发病率或死亡率,因此不应常规开具。然而,最近来自大型回顾性队列和数据库研究的证据表明,OAB 联合 MBP 或 OAB 单独用于预防手术部位感染(SSI)可能具有一定作用。

方法

对纳入接受择期结直肠手术的成年患者的随机对照试验和队列研究进行 OAB 联合或不联合 MBP 的荟萃分析。评估的结局指标包括 SSI、吻合口漏、30 天死亡率、总发病率、肠麻痹的发生、再次手术和艰难梭菌感染。

结果

共纳入 40 项研究,共计 69517 例患者(28 项随机对照试验,n=6437 例;12 项队列研究,n=63080 例)。MBP+OAB 联合治疗与 MBP 单独治疗相比,SSI 显著减少[风险比(RR)0.51,95%置信区间(CI)0.46-0.56,P<0.00001,I=13%],吻合口漏(RR 0.62,95%CI 0.55-0.70,P<0.00001,I=0%),30 天死亡率(RR 0.58,95%CI 0.44-0.76,P<0.0001,I=0%),总发病率(RR 0.67,95%CI 0.63-0.71,P<0.00001,I=0%)和肠麻痹的发生(RR 0.72,95%CI 0.52-0.98,P=0.04,I=36%)均显著降低,艰难梭菌感染率无差异。当 MBP+OAB 联合治疗与 OAB 单独治疗相比时,SSI 或吻合口漏发生率无显著差异,但 30 天死亡率和术后肠麻痹发生率均显著降低。关于 MBP+OAB 联合治疗与不做准备、OAB 单独治疗与不做准备、OAB 与 MBP 之间的比较,文献资料非常有限。

结论

目前的证据表明,OAB 准备在预防择期结直肠手术术后并发症方面具有潜在的重要作用,无论是联合 MBP 还是单独使用。需要进一步的高质量证据来区分 MBP+OAB 联合治疗或 OAB 单独治疗的获益。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a0f1/6570620/4a1a0f488b2b/emss-81356-f001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验