School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan; Center for Evidence-Based Health Care, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Surgeon. 2021 Dec;19(6):e430-e439. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2021.01.001. Epub 2021 Feb 13.
Whether peritoneal lavage is beneficial for the postoperative outcomes of appendectomy is debatable. This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that aimed to determine whether peritoneal lavage leads to improved appendectomy outcomes.
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published before September 2020. The meta-analysis calculated the pooled effect size by using a random effects model. The primary outcome was the incidence of intra-abdominal abscess. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of surgical-site infection, hospital stay duration, operation time, and readmission incidence.
Eight RCTs involving 1487 patients were reviewed. The lavage group had a nonsignificantly lower incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (risk ratio [RR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.18) and surgical-site infection (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.31-1.72) than did the nonirrigation group. Furthermore, the lavage group showed a nonsignificantly shorter hospital stay duration and lower readmission incidence than did the nonirrigation group. However, the lavage group required significantly more operation time than did the nonirrigation group (mean difference: 7.59 min; 95% CI: 4.67-10.50).
Our study revealed that performing peritoneal lavage has no advantage over suction or drainage only in appendectomy. Moreover, peritoneal lavage significantly increased operation time. Consequently, for improving efficiency and reducing operation time, we suggest skipping peritoneal irrigation during appendectomy. However, the available evidence is of variable quality; therefore, high-quality prospective RCTs are required in the future.
腹膜灌洗是否有利于阑尾切除术的术后结果仍存在争议。本研究是对随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析,旨在确定腹膜灌洗是否会导致阑尾切除术结果的改善。
检索了 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中截至 2020 年 9 月前发表的文章。使用随机效应模型计算荟萃分析的合并效应量。主要结局是腹腔脓肿的发生率。次要结局是手术部位感染、住院时间、手术时间和再入院率的发生率。
共纳入 8 项 RCT,涉及 1487 例患者。灌洗组腹腔脓肿(风险比 [RR]:0.81;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.55-1.18)和手术部位感染(RR:0.73;95%CI:0.31-1.72)的发生率显著低于非冲洗组。此外,灌洗组的住院时间和再入院率均显著低于非冲洗组。然而,灌洗组的手术时间明显长于非冲洗组(平均差异:7.59 分钟;95%CI:4.67-10.50)。
我们的研究表明,与仅抽吸或引流相比,在阑尾切除术中进行腹膜灌洗没有优势。此外,腹膜灌洗显著增加了手术时间。因此,为了提高效率和缩短手术时间,我们建议在阑尾切除术中跳过腹膜冲洗。然而,现有证据的质量参差不齐;因此,未来需要高质量的前瞻性 RCT。