结直肠手术前结肠的机械准备-它仍然是实际的吗?

Maria-Alexandra Dragomir, Alexandru Constantinescu, Octavian Andronic
{"title":"结直肠手术前结肠的机械准备-它仍然是实际的吗?","authors":"Maria-Alexandra Dragomir, Alexandru Constantinescu, Octavian Andronic","doi":"10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":74094,"journal":{"name":"Maedica","volume":"19 4","pages":"769-774"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11834836/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanical Preparation of the Colon before Colorectal Surgery - Is It Still Actual?\",\"authors\":\"Maria-Alexandra Dragomir, Alexandru Constantinescu, Octavian Andronic\",\"doi\":\"10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Maedica\",\"volume\":\"19 4\",\"pages\":\"769-774\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11834836/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Maedica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maedica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

机械肠准备(MBP)在结直肠手术中一直是争论的主题。虽然它历来被视为标准的术前做法,但最近的证据质疑其必要性和有效性,特别是在单独使用时。本文综述了MBP的作用演变,它与口服抗生素(OA)的联合,以及它对术后结局的影响,如手术部位感染(SSI)和吻合口漏(AL)。研究表明,与单独MBP相比,MBP联合OA具有更好的益处,特别是在左侧结肠直肠手术中。然而,MBP在右侧切除术中的作用仍然存在争议,关于其有效性的证据相互矛盾。此外,对患者不适、脱水和电解质失衡的担忧引起了对其常规使用的质疑。我们基于11年已发表研究的综合分析强调,采用MBP的决定应个体化,考虑手术干预类型、患者合并症和整体健康状况。虽然MBP+OA有望降低SSI发生率,但需要进一步的研究来评估其更广泛的临床意义,并探索替代方案,包括更新的抗生素,以尽量减少对MBP的依赖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mechanical Preparation of the Colon before Colorectal Surgery - Is It Still Actual?

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信