0
selected
-
1.
Preoperative carbohydrate loading before elective abdominal surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials.
Ricci, C, Ingaldi, C, Alberici, L, Serbassi, F, Pagano, N, De Raffele, E, Minni, F, Pironi, L, Sasdelli, AS, Casadei, R
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2022;(2):313-320
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS The preoperative use of carbohydrate loading (CHO) is recommended in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, even if the advantages remain debatable. The aim was to evaluate the CHO benefits in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS A systematic search of randomized clinical trials was made. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was carried out, reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded the morbidity rate. The secondary endpoints were aspiration/regurgitation rates, the length of stay (LOS), the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), the changes (Δ) in insulin sensitivity or resistance, and the postoperative C- reactive protein (CRP) values. RESULTS CHO loading and water administration had a similar probability of being the approach with a lower morbidity rate (SUCRA = 62.4% and 64.7%). CHO and clear water also had a similar chance of avoiding the PONV (SUCRA of 80.8% and 77%). The aspiration regurgitation rate was not relevant in non-fasting patients (0.06%). CHO administration was associated with the shorter hospitalization (SUCRA 86.9%), with the best metabolic profile (SUCRA values for insulin resistance and sensitivity were 81.1% and 76%). CHO enriched was the best approach for postoperative CRP values. Preoperative fasting was the worst approach for morbidity, PONV, insulin resistance and sensitivity, and CRP (SUCRA values of 32.1%, 21.7%, 10.2%, 3.2%, and 2.0%). CONCLUSION Both preoperative CHO loading and clear water use were superior to the fasting about morbidity. CHO drinks use could provide specific advantages, reduce the PONV rate, and improve carbohydrate homeostasis, inflammatory pathway, and hospitalization.
-
2.
Safety and efficacy of laxatives after major abdominal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Dudi-Venkata, NN, Seow, W, Kroon, HM, Bedrikovetski, S, Moore, JW, Thomas, ML, Sammour, T
BJS open. 2020;(4):577-586
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recovery of gastrointestinal function is often delayed after major abdominal surgery, leading to postoperative ileus (POI). Enhanced recovery protocols recommend laxatives to reduce the duration of POI, but evidence is unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of laxative use after major abdominal surgery. METHODS Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases were searched from inception to May 2019 to identify eligible RCTs focused on elective open or minimally invasive major abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was time taken to passage of stool. Secondary outcomes were time taken to tolerance of diet, time taken to flatus, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications and readmission to hospital. RESULTS Five RCTs with a total of 416 patients were included. Laxatives reduced the time to passage of stool (mean difference (MD) -0·83 (95 per cent c.i. -1·39 to -0·26) days; P = 0·004), but there was significant heterogeneity between studies for this outcome measure. There was no difference in time to passage of flatus (MD -0·17 (-0·59 to 0·25) days; P = 0·432), time to tolerance of diet (MD -0·01 (-0·12 to 0·10) days; P = 0·865) or length of hospital stay (MD 0·01(-1·36 to 1·38) days; P = 0·992). There were insufficient data available on postoperative complications for meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Routine postoperative laxative use after major abdominal surgery may result in earlier passage of stool but does not influence other postoperative recovery parameters. Better data are required for postoperative complications and validated outcome measures.
-
3.
Perioperative Probiotics or Synbiotics in Adults Undergoing Elective Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Chowdhury, AH, Adiamah, A, Kushairi, A, Varadhan, KK, Krznaric, Z, Kulkarni, AD, Neal, KR, Lobo, DN
Annals of surgery. 2020;(6):1036-1047
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To define the impact of perioperative treatment with probiotics or synbiotics on postoperative outcome in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. BACKGROUND Postoperative surgical infection accounts for a third of all cases of sepsis, and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics (preparations that combine probiotics and prebiotics) are nutritional adjuncts that are emerging as novel therapeutic modalities for preventing surgical infections. However, current evidence on their effects is conflicting. METHODS A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and WHO Global Index Medicus electronic databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating probiotics or synbiotics in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, transplant, or hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery. Bibliographies of studies were also searched. The primary outcome measure was incidence of postoperative infectious complications. Secondary outcomes included incidence of noninfectious complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and any treatment-related adverse events. Quantitative pooling of the data was undertaken using a random effects model. RESULTS A total of 34 randomized controlled trials reporting on 2723 participants were included. In the intervention arm, 1354 patients received prebiotic or symbiotic preparations, whereas 1369 patients in the control arm received placebo or standard care. Perioperative administration of either probiotics or synbiotics significantly reduced the risk of infectious complications following abdominal surgery [relative risk (RR) 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.69; P < 0.00001, n = 2723, I = 42%]. Synbiotics showed greater effect on postoperative infections compared with probiotics alone (synbiotics RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.33-0.66; P < 0.0001, n = 1399, I = 53% probiotics RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.80; P < 0.0001, n = 1324, I = 18%). Synbiotics but not probiotics also led to a reduction in total length of stay (synbiotics weighted mean difference: -3.89; 95% CI: -6.60 to -1.18 days; P = 0.005, n = 535, I = 91% probiotics RR: -0.65; 95% CI: -2.03-0.72; P = 0.35, n = 294, I = 65%). There were no significant differences in mortality (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.54-1.80; P = 0.96, n = 1729, I = 0%) or noninfectious complications between the intervention and control groups. The preparations were well tolerated with no significant adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS Probiotics and synbiotics are safe and effective nutritional adjuncts in reducing postoperative infective complications in elective abdominal surgery. The treatment effects are greatest with synbiotics.
-
4.
Is abdominal vascular calcification score valuable in predicting the occurrence of colorectal anastomotic leakage? A meta-analysis.
Tong, L, Xie, D, Song, X, Wu, X, Wen, S, Liu, A
International journal of colorectal disease. 2020;(4):641-653
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a catastrophic surgical complication affecting the prognosis of patients after colorectal surgery. We aimed to determine the value of the arterial calcification (AC) score in predicting AL. METHODS Medline and Embase were searched through November 2019. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the association between AC and AL after colorectal surgery. The fixed-effects model or random-effects model was adopted for data pooling. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the effect of different aortoiliac trajectories. RESULTS Four studies involving 496 patients were included. The calcium volume and calcium score measurements of different trajectories revealed a significant difference with regard to the left and right common iliac arteries, the superior mesenteric artery, and the left common iliac artery. Calcification of the internal iliac artery significantly increased the risk of AL compared with no AL (OR = 1.005; 95% CI 1.002-1.009; P = 0.005), as did calcification of the left internal iliac artery (OR = 1.009; 95% CI 1.002-1.016; P = 0.011), but not of the common iliac artery (OR = 1.001; 95% CI 1.000-1.001; P = 0.317) or common and internal iliac artery (OR = 1.000; 95% CI 1.000-1.000; P = 1.000). CONCLUSIONS AC is associated with increased risk of AL following colorectal surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION CRD42019141236.