肛门手术术前灌肠:随机临床试验。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2025-05-07 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zraf023
Meng-Che Tsai, Ting-Yu Su, Kee-Thai Kiu, Min-Hsuan Yen, Ying-Wei Chen, Ka-Wai Tam, Tuan Ly Huu, Tung-Cheng Chang
{"title":"肛门手术术前灌肠:随机临床试验。","authors":"Meng-Che Tsai, Ting-Yu Su, Kee-Thai Kiu, Min-Hsuan Yen, Ying-Wei Chen, Ka-Wai Tam, Tuan Ly Huu, Tung-Cheng Chang","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zraf023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Haemorrhoidal surgery and anal fistula surgery are two of the most common procedures in proctology. Currently, there is no definitive consensus on the need to administer a preoperative enema. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and benefits of preoperative enemas in anal surgical procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients diagnosed with grade III or IV haemorrhoids and anal fistulas at the Taipei Medical University Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taiwan, between 2022 and 2023, were enrolled in a randomized clinical study comparing the use of preoperative enema (intervention) versus no preoperative enema (control). The primary outcome measures included postoperative visual analogue scale scores and analgesic usage from postoperative day 0 to day 7. Secondary outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, including surgical site infection, postoperative bleeding and urinary retention. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of procedure for the same outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 266 patients were enrolled in this study, with 133 allocated to the enema group and 133 to the control group. No significant differences were observed in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption and postoperative complications between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery also showed no significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption, and postoperative complications between the enema and control groups. However, in the subgroup of patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy, the mean(s.d.) visual analogue scale score was significantly higher in the control group than in the enema group on day 2 (5.69(2.14) versus 3.77(2.45), P = 0.021), day 3 (5.85(2.61) versus 3.92(2.73), P = 0.042) and day 4 (5.23(2.55) versus 3.42(2.18), P = 0.027).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Preoperative enema in anal surgery did not yield additional benefits or reduce complications when compared with patients who did not undergo enema before anal surgery. Based on the study findings, its use can be omitted in anal surgery, especially for patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"9 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12129066/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preoperative enema for anal surgery: randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Meng-Che Tsai, Ting-Yu Su, Kee-Thai Kiu, Min-Hsuan Yen, Ying-Wei Chen, Ka-Wai Tam, Tuan Ly Huu, Tung-Cheng Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjsopen/zraf023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Haemorrhoidal surgery and anal fistula surgery are two of the most common procedures in proctology. Currently, there is no definitive consensus on the need to administer a preoperative enema. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and benefits of preoperative enemas in anal surgical procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients diagnosed with grade III or IV haemorrhoids and anal fistulas at the Taipei Medical University Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taiwan, between 2022 and 2023, were enrolled in a randomized clinical study comparing the use of preoperative enema (intervention) versus no preoperative enema (control). The primary outcome measures included postoperative visual analogue scale scores and analgesic usage from postoperative day 0 to day 7. Secondary outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, including surgical site infection, postoperative bleeding and urinary retention. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of procedure for the same outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 266 patients were enrolled in this study, with 133 allocated to the enema group and 133 to the control group. No significant differences were observed in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption and postoperative complications between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery also showed no significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption, and postoperative complications between the enema and control groups. However, in the subgroup of patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy, the mean(s.d.) visual analogue scale score was significantly higher in the control group than in the enema group on day 2 (5.69(2.14) versus 3.77(2.45), P = 0.021), day 3 (5.85(2.61) versus 3.92(2.73), P = 0.042) and day 4 (5.23(2.55) versus 3.42(2.18), P = 0.027).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Preoperative enema in anal surgery did not yield additional benefits or reduce complications when compared with patients who did not undergo enema before anal surgery. Based on the study findings, its use can be omitted in anal surgery, especially for patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJS Open\",\"volume\":\"9 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12129066/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJS Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zraf023\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zraf023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:痔疮手术和肛瘘手术是肛肠科最常见的两种手术。目前,对于是否需要进行术前灌肠还没有明确的共识。本研究的目的是评估肛门外科手术前灌肠的疗效和益处。方法:在2022年至2023年期间,台北医科大学双和医院诊断为III级或IV级痔疮和肛瘘的患者被纳入一项随机临床研究,比较术前灌肠(干预)和术前未灌肠(对照组)的使用。主要结局指标包括术后视觉模拟评分和术后第0天至第7天的镇痛药使用情况。次要结局是术后并发症,包括手术部位感染、术后出血和尿潴留。根据相同结果的手术类型进行亚组分析。结果:本研究共纳入266例患者,灌肠组133例,对照组133例。两组术后视觉模拟量表评分、镇痛药用量及术后并发症无显著差异。亚组分析显示,行吻合器痔切除术和肛瘘手术的患者在灌肠组和对照组之间的术后视觉模拟评分、镇痛消耗和术后并发症也无显著差异。然而,在接受Milligan-Morgan痔疮切除术的患者亚组中,对照组在第2天(5.69(2.14)比3.77(2.45),P = 0.021)、第3天(5.85(2.61)比3.92(2.73),P = 0.042)和第4天(5.23(2.55)比3.42(2.18),P = 0.027)的平均(s.d)视觉模拟评分明显高于灌肠组。结论:与肛手术前未进行灌肠的患者相比,肛门手术术前灌肠并没有产生额外的益处或减少并发症。根据本研究结果,在肛管手术中可以省略其使用,特别是在进行痔钉固定术和肛瘘手术的患者中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preoperative enema for anal surgery: randomized clinical trial.

Background: Haemorrhoidal surgery and anal fistula surgery are two of the most common procedures in proctology. Currently, there is no definitive consensus on the need to administer a preoperative enema. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and benefits of preoperative enemas in anal surgical procedures.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with grade III or IV haemorrhoids and anal fistulas at the Taipei Medical University Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taiwan, between 2022 and 2023, were enrolled in a randomized clinical study comparing the use of preoperative enema (intervention) versus no preoperative enema (control). The primary outcome measures included postoperative visual analogue scale scores and analgesic usage from postoperative day 0 to day 7. Secondary outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, including surgical site infection, postoperative bleeding and urinary retention. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of procedure for the same outcomes.

Results: A total of 266 patients were enrolled in this study, with 133 allocated to the enema group and 133 to the control group. No significant differences were observed in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption and postoperative complications between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery also showed no significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale scores, analgesic consumption, and postoperative complications between the enema and control groups. However, in the subgroup of patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy, the mean(s.d.) visual analogue scale score was significantly higher in the control group than in the enema group on day 2 (5.69(2.14) versus 3.77(2.45), P = 0.021), day 3 (5.85(2.61) versus 3.92(2.73), P = 0.042) and day 4 (5.23(2.55) versus 3.42(2.18), P = 0.027).

Conclusion: Preoperative enema in anal surgery did not yield additional benefits or reduce complications when compared with patients who did not undergo enema before anal surgery. Based on the study findings, its use can be omitted in anal surgery, especially for patients undergoing stapled haemorrhoidopexy and anal fistula surgery.

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
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信