scholarly journals Comparison of treatment to improve gastrointestinal functions after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean F. Hamel ◽  
Charles Sabbagh ◽  
Arnaud Alves ◽  
Jean M. Regimbeau ◽  
Timothée Vignaud ◽  
...  

AbstractDespite a significant improvement with enhanced recovery programmes (ERP), gastro-intestinal (GI) functions that are impaired after colorectal resection and postoperative ileus (POI) remain a significant issue. In the literature, there is little evidence of the distinction between the treatment assessed within or outside ERP. The purpose was to evaluate the efficiency of treatments to reduce POI and improve GI function recovery within ERP. A search was performed in PubMed and Scopus on 20 September 2019. The studies were included if they compared the effect of the administration of a treatment aiming to treat or prevent POI or improve the early functional outcomes of colorectal surgery within an ERP. The main outcome measures were the occurrence of postoperative ileus, time to first flatus and time to first bowel movement. Treatments that were assessed at least three times were included in a meta-analysis. Among the analysed studies, 28 met the eligibility criteria. Six of them focused on chewing-gum and were only randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 8 of them focused on Alvimopan but none of them were RCT. The other measures were assessed in less than 3 studies over RCTs (n = 11) or retrospective studies (n = 2). In the meta-analysis, chewing gum had no significant effect on the endpoints and Alvimopan allowed a significant reduction of the occurrence of POI. Chewing-gum was not effective on GI function recovery in ERP but Alvimopan and the other measures were not sufficiently studies to draw conclusion. Randomised controlled trials are needed.Systematic review registration number CRD42020167339.

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 2643-2653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farah Roslan ◽  
Anisa Kushairi ◽  
Laura Cappuyns ◽  
Prita Daliya ◽  
Alfred Adiamah

Abstract Background Chewing gum as a form of sham feeding is an inexpensive and well-tolerated means of promoting gastrointestinal motility following major abdominal surgery. Although recognised by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society as one of the multimodal approaches to expedite recovery after surgery, strong evidence to support its use in routine postoperative practice is lacking. Methodology A comprehensive literature review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was performed in the Medline and Embase databases between 2000 and 2019. Studies were selected to compare the use of chewing gum versus standard care in the management of postoperative ileus (POI) in adults undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcome assessed was the incidence of POI. Secondary outcomes included time to passage of flatus, time to defecation, total length of hospital stay and mortality. Results Sixteen RCTs were included in the systematic review, of which ten (970 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of POI was significantly reduced in patients utilising chewing gum compared to those having standard care (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39, 0.79, p = 0.0009). These patients also had a significant reduction in time to passage of flatus (WMD − 0.31, 95% CI − 0.36, − 0.26, p < 0.00001) and time to defecation (WMD − 0.47, 95% CI − 0.60, − 0.34, p < 0.00001), without significant differences in the total length of hospital stay or mortality. Conclusion The use of chewing gum after colorectal surgery is a safe and effective intervention in reducing the incidence of POI and merits routine use alongside other ERAS pathways in the postoperative setting.


2020 ◽  
pp. 000313482095484
Author(s):  
Andrés Zorrilla-Vaca ◽  
Gabriel E. Mena ◽  
Juan Cata ◽  
Ryan Healy ◽  
Michael C. Grant

Background Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) for colorectal surgery bundle evidence-based measures to reduce complications, accelerate postoperative recovery, and improve the value of perioperative health care. Despite these successes, several recent studies have identified an association between ERPs and postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between ERPs for colorectal surgery and postoperative AKI. Methodology After conducting a search of major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect), we conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies that reported on the association between ERPs and postoperative AKI. Results Six observational studies (n = 4765 patients) comparing ERP (n = 2140) to conventional care (n = 2625) were included. Overall, ERP patients had a significantly greater odds of developing postoperative AKI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-3.00, P = .001) than those who received conventional care. There was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test P = 1.0, Egger’s P value = .95). Conclusions Based upon pooled results from observational studies, ERPs are associated with increased odds of developing postoperative AKI compared to conventional perioperative care. The mechanism for this effect is likely multifactorial. Additional research targeting high risk patient populations should evaluate the role of restrictive fluid administration, hemodynamic goals, and scheduled nephrotoxic agents in ERP protocols.


2011 ◽  
Vol 93 (8) ◽  
pp. 583-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Rawlinson ◽  
P Kang ◽  
J Evans ◽  
A Khanna

INTRODUCTION Colorectal surgery has been associated with a complication rate of 15–20% and mean postoperative inpatient stays of 6–11 days. The principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are well established and have been developed to optimise perioperative care and facilitate discharge. The purpose of this systematic review is to present an updated review of perioperative care in colorectal surgery from the available evidence and ERAS group recommendations. METHODS Systematic searches of the PubMed and Embase™ databases and the Cochrane library were conducted. A hand search of bibliographies of identified studies was conducted to identify any additional articles missed by the initial search strategy. RESULTS A total of 59 relevant studies were identified. These included six randomised controlled trials and seven clinical controlled trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These studies showed reductions in duration of inpatient stays in the ERAS groups compared with more traditional care as well as reductions in morbidity and mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS Reviewing the data reveals that ERAS protocols have a role in reducing postoperative morbidity and result in an accelerated recovery following colorectal surgery. Similarly, both primary and overall hospital stays are reduced significantly. However, the available evidence suggests that ERAS protocols do not reduce hospital readmissions or mortality. These findings help to confirm that ERAS protocols should now be implemented as the standard approach for perioperative care in colorectal surgery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 153473541986691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsai-Ju Chien ◽  
Chia-Yu Liu ◽  
Ching-Ju Fang

Background: Breast cancer–related lymphedema (BCRL) is hard to control. Management may include lymphatic drainage, skin care, bandaging, or even surgery. Since acupuncture has been proven to affect the neurophysiology and neuroendocrine systems, it has the potential to control BCRL. Aim: To evaluate the effect of acupuncture in BCRL in randomized controlled trials. Design: A literature search was performed, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement and without language restrictions. Data Sources: Five databases were searched from inception tthrough September 2018. Only studies that fulfilled the eligibility criteria of evaluating the effect of acupuncture on lymphedema in breast cancer were included. The methodological quality of these trials was assessed using the Cochrane criteria, and meta-analysis software (RevMan 5.3) was used for analysis. Results: We examined 178 breast cancer patients from 6 trials. All included randomized controlled trials had medium to high quality, based on the modified Jadad scale. The systematic review showed that acupuncture is safe and has a trend to improve symptoms, but trials did not consistently measure outcomes. The meta-analysis showed that acupuncture produced no significant improvement in the extent of lymphedema as compared with the control intervention (−1.90; 95% confidence interval = −5.39 to 1.59, P = .29). None of the studies reported severe adverse events. Conclusions: Acupuncture is safe and has a trend to improve the lymphedema related to breast cancer, yet it did not significantly change arm circumference in BCRL. Future studies should include both subjective and objective measurements and large-scale studies are warranted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document