The Influence of Mechanical Bowel Preparation in Elective Lower Colorectal Surgery

Objective: This study evaluates the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on anastomosis below the peritoneal verge and questions the influence of MBP on anastomotic leakage in combination with a diverting ileostomy in lower colorectal surgery. Summary Background Data: In a previous large multicenter randomized controlled trial MBP has shown to have no influence on the incidence of anastomotic leakage in overall colorectal surgery. The role of MBP in lower colorectal surgery with or without a diverting ileostomy remains unclear. Methods: This study is a subgroup analysis of a prior multicenter (13 hospitals) randomized trial comparing clinical outcome of MBP versus no MBP. Primary end point was the occurrence of anastomotic leakage and secondary endpoints were septic complications and mortality. Results: Total of 449 Patients underwent a low anterior resection with a primary anastomosis below the peritoneal verge. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was 7.6% for patients who received MBP and 6.6% for patients who did not. Significant risk factors for anastomotic leakage were the American Society of Anesthesiologists-classification (P = 0.005) and male gender (P = 0.007). Of total, 48 patients received a diverting ileostomy during initial surgery; 27 patients received MBP and 21 patients did not. There were no significant differences regarding septic complications and mortality between both groups. Conclusion: MBP has no influence on the incidence of anastomotic leakage in low colorectal surgery. Furthermore, omitting MBP in combination with a diverting ileostomy has no influence oil the incidence of anastomotic leakage, septic complications, and mortality rate

The influence of mechanical bowel preparation on long-term survival in patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluated long-term survival in patients treated with and without mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before colorectal surgery for cancer. METHODS: Long-term outcome of patients of 2 main participating hospitals in a prior multicenter randomized trial comparing clinical outcome of MBP versus no MBP was reviewed. Primary endpoint was cancer-related mortality and secondary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients underwent potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer. One hundred seventy-seven (46%) patients were treated with MBP and 205 (54%) were not before surgery. Median follow-up was 7.6 years (mean 6.6, range .01 to 12.73). There was no significant difference in both cancer-related mortality and all-cause mortality in patients treated with MBP and without MBP (P = .76 and P = .36, respectively). Multivariate analysis, taking account of age, sex, AJCC cancer stage, and ASA classification, also showed no survival difference. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that MBP does not seem to influence long-term survival in patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved