Factors Associated with Receipt of Oral Antibiotic Agents and Mechanical Bowel Preparation before Elective Colectomy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Kane ◽  
Kevin T. Lynch ◽  
Taryn E. Hassinger ◽  
Sook C. Hoang ◽  
Charles M. Friel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Elective Colectomy ◽  
Antibiotic Agents

scholarly journals Mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics versus mechanical bowel preparation only prior rectal surgery (MOBILE2): a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial—study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e051269
Author(s):  
Laura Koskenvuo ◽  
Pipsa Lunkka ◽  
Pirita Varpe ◽  
Marja Hyöty ◽  
Reetta Satokari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Rectal Surgery ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Oral Antibiotics ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Double Blinded

IntroductionMechanical bowel preparation (MBP) prior to rectal surgery is widely used. Based on retrospective data many guidelines recommend mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) to reduce postoperative complications and specifically surgical site infections (SSIs). The primary aim of this study is to examine whether MOABP reduces complications of rectal surgery.Methods and analysisThe MOBILE2 (Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotics vs Mechanical Bowel Preparation Only Prior Rectal Surgery) trial is a multicentre, double-blinded, parallel group, superiority, randomised controlled trial comparing MOABP to MBP among patients scheduled for rectal surgery with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. The patients randomised to the MOABP group receive 1 g neomycin and 1 g metronidazole two times on a day prior to surgery and patients randomised to the MBP group receive identical placebo. Based on power calculations, 604 patients will be enrolled in the study. The primary outcome is Comprehensive Complication Index within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes are SSIs within 30 days after surgery, the number and classification of anastomosis dehiscences, the length of hospital stay, mortality within 90 days after surgery and the number of patients who received adjuvant treatment if needed. Tertiary outcomes are overall survival, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival and difference in quality-of-life before and 1 year after surgery. In addition, the microbiota differences in colon mucosa are analysed.Ethics and disseminationThe Ethics Committee of Helsinki University Hospital approved the study. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.Trial registration numberNCT04281667.

The influence of bowel preparation on postoperative complications in surgical treatment of colorectal cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 10-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zbigniew Małek ◽  
Piotr Małek ◽  
Łukasz Dziki
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Postoperative Mortality ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Wound Dehiscence ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Wound Infections ◽  
Postoperative Wound ◽  
Results Of Treatment ◽  
Early Results

Introduction Colorectal cancer is the most common gastrointestinal cancer treated by departments and surgical clinics in Poland. Currently, the biggest challenge of surgery is to reduce the number of leaks in the bowel anastomoses and postoperative wound infections to a minimum. Objective Whether bowel preparation before surgery affects the early results of treatment? Methods The study was retrospective and included patients operated electively on one surgical center due to colorectal and rectal cancer in years 2013-2018. Patients who underwent surgery were divided into two groups in the study. The first was 109 patients with mechanical bowel irrigation. The second group of 118 patients, in addition to mechanical bowel preparation, received an oral antibiotic. Results The studied groups did not differ significantly in terms of traits that could affect the results of treatment within 30 days of surgery. Postoperative mortality was 0,9% and 0,85%. Complications: leakage of the bowel anastomosis 1,8% and 1,7%, postoperative obstruction 3,7% and 5,0%, wound dehiscence 2,75% and 0,85%, infection of the surgical site 13,8% and 3,4% respectively in the first and second group of patients. Conclusion 1. Mechanical bowel preparation in combination with the oral supply of antibiotic significantly reduces the frequency of surgical site infection compared to the mechanical rinsing itself. 2. Type of preparation of the intestine before the surgery does not significantly affect postoperative mortality and other complications, including anastomotic leak, but may be important for the frequency of postoperative wound dehiscence.

scholarly journals Another Brick in the Wall of an Ongoing Discussion– Reduction of Anastomotic Leaks after Colorectal Resection by Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation in Combination with Oral and Parenteral Antibiotics?–A Clinical Retrospective Single Center Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Safia O ◽  
◽  
Kuebler S ◽  
Mall JW ◽  
Tallbot SR ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Elective Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Center Study

Background: In colorectal surgery, postoperative Anastomotic Leak (AL) is a serious complication. Besides the surgeon`s experience, bowel preparation may have an impact on AL, but the published data are still inconclusive. The purpose of this retrospective single center study was to investigate the role of preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation (MBP) in combination with Oral Antibiotic Bowel Preparation (OBP) and parenteral antibiotics in a certified highvolume colorectal center. Methods: In the period of January 2017 to December 2019, all colon and rectal surgeries were recorded and separated into emergency and elective surgeries. Patients in the elective surgery group were further divided into two groups: patients with Bowel Preparation (BP) and patients without BP and were evaluated concerning to AL, postoperative hospital length of stay and mortality. Results: Between 2017 to 2019, 625 patients underwent colorectal surgery. 262 patients had emergency operations and were therefore excluded from the study. 363 patients underwent colorectal elective surgery (197men, 166 women). 44.0% received Combined Bowel Preparation (CBP), 46.8% received no BP, 3.3% received OBP only, 4.1% received MBP only, and for 1.1% nothing was documented. CBP was not only associated with a reduction in the rate of AL (P=0.038) (14.1% vs. 4.4%), but also with reduction in mortality (P=0.032) (7.6% vs. 1.2%) and length of stay (P=0.016) (14 vs. 11 days). Conclusion: Our retrospective data showed a significant impact of preoperative intestinal preparation with MBP in combination with OBP and parenteral antibiotics on AL, length of stay and mortality. Therefore we strongly recommend the use of this regimen of preoperative BP in elective colorectal surgery.

Usefulness of Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation in Patients with Colon Cancer who Undergo Elective Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Trial Using Oral Antibiotics

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 192-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiyuki Suzuki ◽  
Sotaro Sadahiro ◽  
Akira Tanaka ◽  
Kazutake Okada ◽  
Gota Saito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Oral Antibiotics ◽  
Intravenous Antibiotics ◽  
Colon Cancer Surgery ◽  
To Receive

Background: To prevent surgical site infection (SSI) in colorectal surgery, the combination of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), oral antibiotic bowel preparation (OABP), and the intravenous antibiotics have been proposed as standard treatment. We conducted an RCT comparing the incidence of SSI between MBP + OABP and OABP alone after receiving a single dose of intravenous antibiotics. Methods: The study group comprised 254 patients who underwent elective surgery for colon cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to receive MBP + OABP and intravenous antibiotics (MBP + OABP group) or to receive OABP and intravenous antibiotics (OABP alone group). Results: Overall, 125 patients in MBP + OABP group and 126 patients in OABP alone group were eligible. Incisional SSI occurred in 3 patients (2.4%) in MBP + OABP group, and 8 patients (6.3%) in the OABP-alone group. Organ/space SSI developed in 0 patients (0%) and in 4 patients (3.2%) in each group respectively. The OABP-alone group was thus not shown to be noninferior to the MBP + OABP group in the incidences of incisional SSI or organ/space SSI. Other infectious complications developed in 7 patients (5.6%) and in 6 patients (4.8%) in each group, indicating the non-inferiority of OABP alone to MBP + OABP. Conclusions: MBP combined with oral antibiotics and intravenous antibiotics remains standard in elective colon cancer surgery.

scholarly journals The Prevention of Surgical Site Infection in Elective Colon Surgery

Scientifica ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald E. Fry
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Local Environment ◽  
Colon Surgery ◽  
Colon Resection ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Elective Colon Surgery ◽  
Elective Colon

Infections at the surgical site continue to occur in as many as 20% of elective colon resection cases. Methods to reduce these infections are inconsistently applied. Surgical site infection (SSI) is the result of multiple interactive variables including the inoculum of bacteria that contaminate the site, the virulence of the contaminating microbes, and the local environment at the surgical site. These variables that promote infection are potentially offset by the effectiveness of the host defense. Reduction in the inoculum of bacteria is achieved by appropriate surgical site preparation, systemic preventive antibiotics, and use of mechanical bowel preparation in conjunction with the oral antibiotic bowel preparation. Intraoperative reduction of hematoma, necrotic tissue, foreign bodies, and tissue dead space will reduce infections. Enhancement of the host may be achieved by perioperative supplemental oxygenation, maintenance of normothermia, and glycemic control. These methods require additional research to identify optimum application. Uniform application of currently understood methods and continued research into new methods to reduce microbial contamination and enhancement of host responsiveness can lead to better outcomes.

scholarly journals Oral antibiotics prior to colorectal surgery: Do they have to be combined with mechanical bowel preparation?

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 922-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tessa Mulder ◽  
Jan A.J.W. Kluytmans
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Oral Antibiotics ◽  
Risk Infection

AbstractTo reduce the of risk infection after colorectal surgery, oral antibiotic preparation (OAP) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) can be applied. Whether OAP can be used without MBP is unclear. A meta-analysis of observational studies demonstrated comparable effectiveness of OAP with and without MBP regarding SSI risk.

scholarly journals How to Prevent Anastomotic Leak in Colorectal Surgery? A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 213-222
Author(s):  
Mohamed Ali Chaouch ◽  
Tarek Kellil ◽  
Camillia Jeddi ◽  
Ahmed Saidani ◽  
Faouzi Chebbi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Bowel Preparation ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Rectal Surgery ◽  
Mechanical Bowel Preparation ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Colonic Surgery ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Published Evidence ◽  
Handsewn Anastomosis

Anastomosis leakage (AL) after colorectal surgery is an embarrassing problem. It is associated with poor consequence. This review aims to summarize published evidence on prevention of AL after colorectal surgery and provide recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. We conducted bibliographic research on January 15, 2020, of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We retained meta-analysis, reviews, and randomized clinical trials. We concluded that mechanical bowel preparation did not reduce AL. It seems that oral antibiotic or oral antibiotic with mechanical bowel preparation could reduce the risk of AL. The surgical approach did not affect the AL rate. The low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery could reduce the AL rate. The mechanical anastomosis is superior to handsewn anastomosis only in case of right colectomies, with similar results in rectal surgery between the 2 anastomosis techniques. In the case of right colectomies, this anastomosis could be performed intracorporeally or extracorporeally with similar outcomes. The air leak test did not reduce AL. There is no interest of external drainage in colonic surgery but drains reduced the rate of AL and rate of reoperation after low anterior resection. The transanal tube reduced the rate of AL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document