Yuan Yuan, Gao Qi, Yang Hui
School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Department of Nursing, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 55 Section 4, Renmin Nan Lu, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2025 May 23;25(1):401. doi: 10.1186/s12876-025-03985-x.
Rectal resection could potentially cause low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Although recent studies have reported the efficacy of enema against LARS, no systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted.
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane library and Web of Science. Eligible studies that quantified the effect of enema vs. other approaches on LARS following rectal resection were selected. Meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan 5.4 software and StataMP 17. Where meta-analysis was not possible, vote counting was performed.
This study comprised five RCTs with 159 participants and meta-analysis was performed in 4 studies. Compared with the control group, enema reduced LARS score with mean differences of -10.84 (95% CI: -16.71 to -4.98, P = 0.0003). Subgroup analysis based on the type of enema were performed, with three European studies using retrograde enema and one Asian study using antegrade enema, with mean differences of -13.77 (95% CI: -17.97 to -9.57, P < 0.00001) and -4.86 (95% CI: -9.26 to -0.46, P = 0.03), respectively. According to follow-up period, two trials reported short-term effects and the other two investigated medium/long-term effects with mean differences of -14.22 (95% CI: -20.05 to -8.38, P = 0.23) and -7.59 (95% CI: -14.47 to -0.71, P = 0.13), respectively. One study that used antegrade enema was key contributor to the substantial interstudy heterogeneity by the leave-one-out sensitivity analysis. After exclusion of this study, no heterogeneity was found (t = 0.00; χ = 1.63, df = 2, p = 0.44; I = 0%). Vote counting also showed positive effects of enema on LARS.
Enema, particularly retrograde enema, is effective in managing LARS. However, the effectiveness of antegrade enema deserves further investigation. The short-term effects of enema are more pronounced compared to long-term outcomes. Due to the limited number of included studies, these findings should be taken cautiously. More RCTs on other continents are needed to validate the impact of enema on LARS, as well as to develop standardised protocols to facilitate clinical practice.
CRD42024539973.
直肠切除术可能会导致低位前切除综合征(LARS)。尽管最近的研究报告了灌肠治疗LARS的疗效,但尚未进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
在PubMed、EMBASE、MEDLINE、CINAHL Complete、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science中进行系统检索。选择量化灌肠与其他方法对直肠切除术后LARS影响的合格研究。使用RevMan 5.4软件和StataMP 17进行荟萃分析。在无法进行荟萃分析的情况下,进行投票计数。
本研究包括5项随机对照试验,共159名参与者,对4项研究进行了荟萃分析。与对照组相比,灌肠降低了LARS评分,平均差值为-10.84(95%CI:-16.71至-4.98,P = 0.0003)。根据灌肠类型进行亚组分析,三项欧洲研究使用逆行灌肠,一项亚洲研究使用顺行灌肠,平均差值分别为-13.77(95%CI:-17.97至-9.57,P < 0.00001)和-4.86(95%CI:-9.26至-0.46,P = 0.03)。根据随访期,两项试验报告了短期效果,另外两项研究了中长期效果,平均差值分别为-14.22(95%CI:-20.05至-8.38,P = 0.23)和-7.59(95%CI:-14.47至-0.71,P = 0.13)。通过逐一剔除敏感性分析,一项使用顺行灌肠的研究是研究间显著异质性的主要贡献者。排除该研究后,未发现异质性(t = 0.00;χ = 1.63,df = 2,p = 0.44;I = 0%)。投票计数也显示灌肠对LARS有积极作用。
灌肠,尤其是逆行灌肠,对治疗LARS有效。然而顺行灌肠的有效性值得进一步研究。与长期结果相比,灌肠的短期效果更明显。由于纳入研究数量有限,这些发现应谨慎对待。需要在其他大洲进行更多的随机对照试验,以验证灌肠对LARS的影响,并制定标准化方案以促进临床实践。
PROSPERO注册编号:CRD42024539973。