腹部手术前灌肠有用吗?

François Mosimann, Patrick Cornu
{"title":"腹部手术前灌肠有用吗?","authors":"François Mosimann,&nbsp;Patrick Cornu","doi":"10.1080/110241598750005886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective:</h3>\n \n <p>To assess the effect of preoperative enemas on the recovery of peristalsis after non-colonic abdominal operations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design:</h3>\n \n <p>Prospective randomised trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting:</h3>\n \n <p>University hospital, Switzerland.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Subjects:</h3>\n \n <p>116 adult patients (&gt;16 year old) about to undergo elective non-colonic abdominal operations under general anaesthaesia were considered.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Intervention:</h3>\n \n <p>Two groups were randomised to receive a one litre water and glycerine enema the day before operation (<i>n</i> = 53) or no preoperative intestinal preparation (<i>n</i> = 53).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main outcome measures:</h3>\n \n <p>Return of peristalsis after operation, assessed by auscultation of bowel sounds and time of the first spontaneous faeces. All participants were followed daily for 10 days or until discharge by the same observer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results:</h3>\n \n <p>110 patients gave informed consent, 6 refused to participate, and 4 had to be withdrawn after randomisation, leaving 106 for analysis. The patients without an enema recovered bowel sounds activity sooner (<i>p</i> = 0.02) and passed their first spontaneous faeces significantly earlier (<i>p</i> = 0.01). No subgroup of patients benefited from an enema.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion:</h3>\n \n <p>Preoperative enemas delay rather than improve the return of normal peristalsis after surgery. We recommend this practice should be abandoned. Copyright © 1998 Taylor and Francis Ltd.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100508,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Surgery","volume":"164 7","pages":"527-530"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/110241598750005886","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are enemas given before abdominal operations useful?\",\"authors\":\"François Mosimann,&nbsp;Patrick Cornu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/110241598750005886\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective:</h3>\\n \\n <p>To assess the effect of preoperative enemas on the recovery of peristalsis after non-colonic abdominal operations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design:</h3>\\n \\n <p>Prospective randomised trial.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Setting:</h3>\\n \\n <p>University hospital, Switzerland.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Subjects:</h3>\\n \\n <p>116 adult patients (&gt;16 year old) about to undergo elective non-colonic abdominal operations under general anaesthaesia were considered.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Intervention:</h3>\\n \\n <p>Two groups were randomised to receive a one litre water and glycerine enema the day before operation (<i>n</i> = 53) or no preoperative intestinal preparation (<i>n</i> = 53).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main outcome measures:</h3>\\n \\n <p>Return of peristalsis after operation, assessed by auscultation of bowel sounds and time of the first spontaneous faeces. All participants were followed daily for 10 days or until discharge by the same observer.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results:</h3>\\n \\n <p>110 patients gave informed consent, 6 refused to participate, and 4 had to be withdrawn after randomisation, leaving 106 for analysis. The patients without an enema recovered bowel sounds activity sooner (<i>p</i> = 0.02) and passed their first spontaneous faeces significantly earlier (<i>p</i> = 0.01). No subgroup of patients benefited from an enema.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion:</h3>\\n \\n <p>Preoperative enemas delay rather than improve the return of normal peristalsis after surgery. We recommend this practice should be abandoned. Copyright © 1998 Taylor and Francis Ltd.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"164 7\",\"pages\":\"527-530\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/110241598750005886\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1080/110241598750005886\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1080/110241598750005886","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:探讨术前灌肠对非结肠腹部手术后肠蠕动恢复的影响。设计:前瞻性随机试验。地点:瑞士大学医院。对象:116例(16岁)拟在全身麻醉下行选择性非结肠腹部手术的成人患者。干预:两组随机分为两组,术前接受1升水和甘油灌肠(n = 53)或术前不进行肠道准备(n = 53)。主要观察指标:术后肠蠕动恢复情况,通过听诊肠音和首次自然排便时间进行评估。所有参与者每天由同一名观察员随访10天或直到出院。结果:110名患者知情同意,6名患者拒绝参与,4名患者在随机化后不得不退出,剩下106名患者进行分析。未灌肠的患者恢复肠音活动较早(p = 0.02),首次自然排便较早(p = 0.01)。没有亚组患者从灌肠中获益。结论:术前灌肠延迟而非促进术后正常肠蠕动的恢复。我们建议放弃这种做法。版权所有©1998 Taylor and Francis Ltd。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are enemas given before abdominal operations useful?

Objective:

To assess the effect of preoperative enemas on the recovery of peristalsis after non-colonic abdominal operations.

Design:

Prospective randomised trial.

Setting:

University hospital, Switzerland.

Subjects:

116 adult patients (>16 year old) about to undergo elective non-colonic abdominal operations under general anaesthaesia were considered.

Intervention:

Two groups were randomised to receive a one litre water and glycerine enema the day before operation (n = 53) or no preoperative intestinal preparation (n = 53).

Main outcome measures:

Return of peristalsis after operation, assessed by auscultation of bowel sounds and time of the first spontaneous faeces. All participants were followed daily for 10 days or until discharge by the same observer.

Results:

110 patients gave informed consent, 6 refused to participate, and 4 had to be withdrawn after randomisation, leaving 106 for analysis. The patients without an enema recovered bowel sounds activity sooner (p = 0.02) and passed their first spontaneous faeces significantly earlier (p = 0.01). No subgroup of patients benefited from an enema.

Conclusion:

Preoperative enemas delay rather than improve the return of normal peristalsis after surgery. We recommend this practice should be abandoned. Copyright © 1998 Taylor and Francis Ltd.

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