colonic resection

结肠切除术
  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:越来越多的证据表明,机械肠道准备(MBP)对减少择期结肠切除术后并发症的影响很小。这项研究调查了选择性结肠切除术前MBP的必要性。
    方法:在PubMed,奥维德,和Cochrane图书馆,以确定比较选择性结肠切除术前没有准备的MBP效果的研究,直到2023年5月26日。收集手术相关结果并随后进行分析。主要结果包括吻合口漏(AL)和手术部位感染(SSI)的发生率,使用ReviewManager软件(v5.3)进行分析。
    结果:分析包括14项研究,包括七个RCT,5146名参与者。人口统计学信息在各组之间是一致的。两组间AL差异无统计学意义(P=0.43,OR=1.16,95%CI(0.80,1.68),I2=0%)或SSI(P=0.47,OR=1.20,95%CI(0.73,1.96),I2=0%),其他结果也没有显著差异.对口服抗生素使用的亚组分析显示结果没有显着变化。然而,在右结肠切除术的情况下,未准备组的SSI发生率显着降低(P=0.01,OR=0.52,95%CI(0.31,0.86),I2=1%)。在其他亚组分析中没有发现显著差异。
    结论:目前的证据有力地表明,择期结肠切除术前的MBP在减少术后并发症方面没有显著的益处。因此,在选择性结肠切除术前放弃MBP是合理的,无论肿瘤的位置。
    BACKGROUND: Growing evidence demonstrates minimal impact of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on reducing postoperative complications following elective colectomy. This study investigated the necessity of MBP prior to elective colonic resection.
    METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing the effects of MBP with no preparation before elective colectomy, up until May 26, 2023. Surgical-related outcomes were compiled and subsequently analyzed. The primary outcomes included the incidence of anastomosis leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI), analyzed using Review Manager Software (v 5.3).
    RESULTS: The analysis included 14 studies, comprising seven RCTs with 5146 participants. Demographic information was consistent across groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of AL ((P = 0.43, OR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.80, 1.68), I2 = 0%) or SSI (P = 0.47, OR = 1.20, 95% CI (0.73, 1.96), I2 = 0%), nor were there significant differences in other outcomes. Subgroup analysis on oral antibiotic use showed no significant changes in results. However, in cases of right colectomy, the group without preparation showed a significantly lower incidence of SSI (P = 0.01, OR = 0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.86), I2 = 1%). No significant differences were found in other subgroup analyses.
    CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence robustly indicates that MBP before elective colectomy does not confer significant benefits in reducing postoperative complications. Therefore, it is justified to forego MBP prior to elective colectomy, irrespective of tumor location.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    BACKGROUND: Diverticulitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases in western population. Colonic resection is recommended by international guidelines as a routinely used technique for purulent diverticulitis. Laparoscopic lavage was introduced as a non-resection alternative. The studies available so far have shown contradictory results. This meta-analysis aims to compare laparoscopic lavage versus colonic resection in patients with Hinchey Ⅲ-Ⅳ diverticulitis.
    METHODS: We did a systematic review of articles published before March 20, 2019, with no language restriction by searching PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE databases, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar databases. We included all RCTs and cohort studies comparing outcomes between patients with Hinchey Ⅲ-Ⅳ diverticulitis undergoing laparoscopic lavage versus colonic resection. Important outcomes were mortality, complications, length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates. We combined data to assess the outcomes using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model.
    RESULTS: A total of 569 patients with diverticulitis of which more than 80% were Hinchey Ⅲ were enrolled from 3 RCTs and 5 cohort studies. Laparoscopic lavage was associated with shorter operative time (WMD -78.9, 95%CI -100.58 to -57.11, P < 0.0001) and total postoperative hospital stay (WMD -7.62, 95%CI -11.60 to -3.63, P = 0.0002) but a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess (OR 2.69, 95%CI 1.39 to 5.21, P = 0.0032) and secondary peritonitis (OR 5.30, 95%CI 1.91 to 14.73, P = 0.0014).
    CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic lavage for patients with Hinchey Ⅲ to Ⅳ diverticulitis does provide similar mortality, shorter operative time and hospital stay. However, the evidence so far suggests that it might be inadequate for sepsis control and may result in more unplanned reoperations. Further studies are needed to standardize the formal indication for laparoscopic lavage.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号