Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, ISSN: 1553-4650, Vol: 30, Issue: 9, Page: 695-704
2023
- 2Citations
- 7Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
To assess the efficacy and safety of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before benign laparoscopic or vaginal gynecologic surgeries. Database searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Sciences and citations and reference lists published up to December 2021. Randomized clinical trials in any language comparing MBP with no preparation were included. Two reviewers independently screened 925 records and extracted data from 12 selected articles and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials tool. A random-effects model was used for the analysis. Surgeon findings (surgical field view, quality of bowel handling and bowel preparation), operative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, length of stay, surgical site infection), and patient's preoperative symptoms and satisfaction were collected. Thirteen studies (1715 patients) assessing oral and rectal preparations before laparoscopic and vaginal gynecologic surgeries were included. No significant differences were observed with or without MBP on surgical field view (primary outcome, risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97–1.05, p = .66, I 2 = 0%), bowel handling (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95–1.08, p = .78, I 2 = 67%), or bowel preparation. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in perioperative findings. MBP was associated with increased pain (mean difference [MD] 11.62[2.80–20.44], I 2 = 76, p = .01), weakness (MD 10.73[0.60–20.87], I 2 = 94, p = .04), hunger (MD 17.52 [8.04–27.00], I 2 = 83, p = .0003), insomnia (MD 10.13[0.57–19.68], I 2 = 82, p = .04), and lower satisfaction (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.87, I 2 = 76%, p = .002) compared with controls. MBP has not been associated with improved surgical field view, bowel handling, or operative outcome. However, in view of the adverse effects induced, its routine use before benign gynecologic surgeries should be abandoned.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155346502300170X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2023.05.001; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85160071179&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37150431; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155346502300170X; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2023.05.001
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know