Gum chewing enhances early recovery of bowel function following transperitoneal abdominal aortic surgery

Chewing Gum Cannot Reduce Postoperative Abdominal Pain and Nausea After Posterior Spinal Fusions in Patients With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of chewing gum on postoperative abdominal pain, nausea, and hospital stays after posterior spinal fusions (PSFs) in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Chewing gum had been extensively reported to improve bowel motility and is recommended to hasten bowel recovery following gastrointestinal surgery. However, there is no conclusive evidence regarding the effect of chewing gum on postoperative abdominal pain, nausea, and hospital stays after PSFs in AIS patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed for relevant randomized controlled trials using PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Embase. Studies were selected to compare the use of chewing gum versus standard care in the management of postoperative abdominal pain and nausea in AIS patients undergoing PSFs. Hospital stays were also investigated. The study was conducted using the checklist for PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses).

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review and the meta-analysis. No significant effect of chewing gum was highlighted concerning the postoperative abdominal pain scores at 24 and 48 hours [24 h: mean difference (MD)=0.45, 95% CI=-0.97 to 0.07, P =0.09; 48 h: MD=-0.24, 95% CI=-0.79 to 0.32, P =0.41]. No significant difference regarding the postoperative nausea scores was found at 24 and 48 hours (24 h: MD=0.26, 95% CI=-0.27 to 0.79, P =0.34; 48 h: MD=0.06, 95% CI=-0.36 to 0.48, P =0.77). No significant difference regarding hospital stays was found (MD=0.13, 95% CI=-0.02 to 0.28, P =0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current studies, chewing gum does not have a significant effect on postoperative abdominal pain, nausea, or hospital stays after PSFs in AIS patients. As the effect of chewing gum in reducing postoperative abdominal pain exhibits a tendency towards statistical significance ( P =0.09), the effect of chewing gum in spinal surgery merits further studies with larger sample size.

A systematic review of enhanced recovery after surgery for vascular operations

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing vascular operations face high rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications and delayed return to baseline. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), with its aim of delivering high-quality perioperative care and accelerating recovery, appears well suited to address the needs of this population.

METHODS

In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we performed a systematic review to characterize the use and effectiveness of ERAS in all types of vascular and endovascular operations. We queried MEDLINE (through PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Prospero, and Google Scholar. Two reviewers independently completed screening, review, and quality assessment. Eligible articles described the use of ERAS pathways for vascular operations from January 1, 1997, through December 7, 2017. Details regarding patients' demographics and use of the ERAS pathway or selected ERAS components were extracted. When available, results including perioperative morbidity, mortality, and in-hospital length of stay were collected. The studies with control groups that evaluated ERAS-like pathways were meta-analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In the final analysis, 19 studies were included: four randomized controlled trials and 15 observational studies. By Let Evidence Guide Every New Decision (LEGEND) criteria, the two good-quality studies are randomized controlled trials that evaluated a specific part of an ERAS pathway. All other studies were considered poor quality. Meta-analysis of the five studies describing ERAS-like pathways demonstrated a reduction in length of stay by 3.5 days (P = .0012).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on systematic review, the use of ERAS pathways in vascular surgery is limited, and existing evidence of their feasibility and effectiveness is low quality. There is minimal poor- to moderate-quality evidence describing the use of ERAS pathways in open aortic operations. There is scarce, poor-quality evidence related to ERAS pathways in lower extremity operations and no published evidence related to ERAS pathways in endovascular operations. Although the risk of bias is high in most of the studies done to date, all of them observed improvements in length of stay, postoperative diet, and ambulation. It is reasonable to consider the implementation of ERAS pathways in the care of vascular surgery patients, specifically those undergoing open aortic operations, but many of the details will be based on limited data and extrapolation from other surgical specialties until further research is done.

Usage of Chewing Gum in Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigated the effectiveness of chewing gum on promoting faster bowel function and its ability to hasten recovery for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) after posterior spinal fusion (PSF) surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sham feeding with chewing gum had been reported to reduce the incidence of postoperative ileus by accelerating recovery of bowel function.

METHODS

We prospectively recruited and randomized 60 patients with AIS scheduled for PSF surgery into treatment (chewing gum) and control group. The patient-controlled anesthesia usage, wound pain score, abdominal pain score, nausea score, and abdominal girth were assessed and recorded at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 hours postoperatively. The timing for the first fluid intake, first oral intake, sitting up, walking, first flatus after surgery, first bowel opening after surgery, and duration of hospital stay were also assessed and recorded.

RESULTS

We found that there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in patient-controlled anesthesia usage, wound pain score, abdominal pain score, nausea score, and abdominal girth between treatment (chewing gum) and control groups. We also found that there were no significant difference (P > 0.05) in postoperative recovery parameters, which were the first fluid intake, first oral intake, sitting up after surgery, walking after surgery, first flatus after surgery, first bowel opening after surgery, and duration of hospital stay between both groups. The wound pain was the worst at 12 hours postoperatively, which progressively improved in both groups. The abdominal pain progressively worsened to the highest score at 48 hours in the treatment group and 36 hours in the control group before improving after that. The pattern of severity and recovery of wound pain and abdominal pain was different.

CONCLUSION

We found that chewing gum did not significantly reduce the abdominal pain, promote faster bowel function, or hasten patient recovery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Effect of gum chewing on reducing postoperative ileus and recovery after colorectal surgery: A randomised controlled trial

AIM

This study aimed to determine the effect of gum chewing on the reduction of postoperative ileus and recovery after surgery.

METHODS

This study was conducted a randomized controlled trial in 60 patients who underwent colorectal surgery between November 2011 and December 2012. Patients in the experimental group chewed gum three times a day. The time of flatus and defecation, the time to start feeding, pain levels and time of discharge were monitored.

RESULTS

Post-surgery results for gum-chewing were first flatus and defecation times and the time to start feeding was shorter; pain levels were lower on the 3rd - 5th days; patients were discharged in a shorter time post-surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Chewing gum is a simple intervention for reducing postoperative ileus after colorectal surgery. Further studies that examine the effectiveness of gum chewing on other surgical interventions in which the development risk of postoperative ileus should be performed.

The Use of Chewing Gum Postoperatively in Pediatric Scoliosis Patients Facilitates an Earlier Return to Normal Bowel Function

PURPOSE

In surgical correction of scoliosis in pediatric patients, gastrointestinal complications including postoperative ileus can result in extended hospital stays, poorer pain management, slower progression with physical therapy, and overall decreased patient satisfaction. In patients undergoing gastrointestinal, gynecological, and urological surgery, gum chewing has been shown to reduce time to flatus and passage of feces. The authors hypothesized that chewing gum could also speed return to normal bowel function in pediatric patients undergoing surgical correction of scoliosis.

METHODS

The researchers obtained institutional review board approval for a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Eligible patients included all adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion. Exclusion criteria included previous gastrointestinal surgery or preexisting gastrointestinal disease. Patients were randomized by coin flip. The treatment group chewed sugar-free bubble gum 5 times a day for 20 to 30 minutes beginning on postoperative day 1; the control group did not chew gum. Patients were asked a series of questions regarding subjective gastrointestinal symptoms each day. Time to flatus and first passage of feces were recorded as indicators of return to normal bowel function. Normality of data was assessed using normal probability plots.

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients completed the study (69 females and 14 males; mean age, 14.4 years). Of the 42 patients in the chewing gum group, 8 elected to stop chewing gum regularly before discharge for to a variety of reasons. Patients who chewed gum experienced first bowel movement on average 145.9 hours after surgery, 30.9 hours before those who did not chew gum (p = .04). Gum-chewing patients first experienced flatus an average of 55.2 hours after surgery, compared with 62.3 hours for controls. This trend did not reach statistical significance (p = .12). No difference was noted in duration of hospital stay, medications administered as required, or subjective symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Chewing gum after posterior spinal fusion for scoliosis is safe and may speed return of normal bowel function. Chewing gum after surgical correction of scoliosis facilitates an earlier return to normal bowel function, which may improve patient satisfaction in the early postoperative period.

Chewing gum for postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function

BACKGROUND

Ileus commonly occurs after abdominal surgery, and is associated with complications and increased length of hospital stay (LOHS). Onset of ileus is considered to be multifactorial, and a variety of preventative methods have been investigated. Chewing gum (CG) is hypothesised to reduce postoperative ileus by stimulating early recovery of gastrointestinal (GI) function, through cephalo-vagal stimulation. There is no comprehensive review of this intervention in abdominal surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether chewing gum after surgery hastens the return of gastrointestinal function.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO) and ISI Web of Science (June 2014). We hand-searched reference lists of identified studies and previous reviews and systematic reviews, and contacted CG companies to ask for information on any studies using their products. We identified proposed and ongoing studies from clinicaltrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and metaRegister of Controlled Trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included completed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that used postoperative CG as an intervention compared to a control group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected data and assessed study quality using an adapted Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool, and resolved disagreements by discussion. We assessed overall quality of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Studies were split into subgroups: colorectal surgery (CRS), caesarean section (CS) and other surgery (OS). We assessed the effect of CG on time to first flatus (TFF), time to bowel movement (TBM), LOHS and time to bowel sounds (TBS) through meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We investigated the influence of study quality, reviewers' methodological estimations and use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes using sensitivity analyses. We used meta-regression to explore if surgical site or ROB scores predicted the extent of the effect estimate of the intervention on continuous outcomes. We reported frequency of complications, and descriptions of tolerability of gum and cost.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 81 studies that recruited 9072 participants for inclusion in our review. We categorised many studies at high or unclear risk of the bias' assessed. There was statistical evidence that use of CG reduced TFF [overall reduction of 10.4 hours (95% CI: -11.9, -8.9): 12.5 hours (95% CI: -17.2, -7.8) in CRS, 7.9 hours (95% CI: -10.0, -5.8) in CS, 10.6 hours (95% CI: -12.7, -8.5) in OS]. There was also statistical evidence that use of CG reduced TBM [overall reduction of 12.7 hours (95% CI: -14.5, -10.9): 18.1 hours (95% CI: -25.3, -10.9) in CRS, 9.1 hours (95% CI: -11.4, -6.7) in CS, 12.3 hours (95% CI: -14.9, -9.7) in OS]. There was statistical evidence that use of CG slightly reduced LOHS [overall reduction of 0.7 days (95% CI: -0.8, -0.5): 1.0 days in CRS (95% CI: -1.6, -0.4), 0.2 days (95% CI: -0.3, -0.1) in CS, 0.8 days (95% CI: -1.1, -0.5) in OS]. There was statistical evidence that use of CG slightly reduced TBS [overall reduction of 5.0 hours (95% CI: -6.4, -3.7): 3.21 hours (95% CI: -7.0, 0.6) in CRS, 4.4 hours (95% CI: -5.9, -2.8) in CS, 6.3 hours (95% CI: -8.7, -3.8) in OS]. Effect sizes were largest in CRS and smallest in CS. There was statistical evidence of heterogeneity in all analyses other than TBS in CRS.There was little difference in mortality, infection risk and readmission rate between the groups. Some studies reported reduced nausea and vomiting and other complications in the intervention group. CG was generally well-tolerated by participants. There was little difference in cost between the groups in the two studies reporting this outcome.Sensitivity analyses by quality of studies and robustness of review estimates revealed no clinically important differences in effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis of ERAS studies showed a smaller effect size on TFF, larger effect size on TBM, and no difference between groups for LOHS.Meta-regression analyses indicated that surgical site is associated with the extent of the effect size on LOHS (all surgical subgroups), and TFF and TBM (CS and CRS subgroups only). There was no evidence that ROB score predicted the extent of the effect size on any outcome. Neither variable explained the identified heterogeneity between studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified some evidence for the benefit of postoperative CG in improving recovery of GI function. However, the research to date has primarily focussed on CS and CRS, and largely consisted of small, poor quality trials. Many components of the ERAS programme also target ileus, therefore the benefit of CG alongside ERAS may be reduced, as we observed in this review. Therefore larger, better quality RCTS in an ERAS setting in wider surgical disciplines would be needed to improve the evidence base for use of CG after surgery.

Chewing gum reduces postoperative ileus following abdominal surgery: a meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Chewing gum proposal has been used in surgery to reduce postoperative ileus for more than 10 years; however, the efficacy remains imprecise. The aim of this study was to accurately assess whether the use of the chewing gum could reduce duration of postoperative ileus following the abdominal surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through December 2012 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing with and without the use of chewing gum in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The outcome of interest was time to flatus, time to bowel movement, and length of stay. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine the impact of different studies structural design. Cumulative meta-analyses were used to examine how the evidence has changed over time.

RESULTS

Seventeen randomized controlled trials involving 1374 participants were included. Overall time (in days) for the patients to pass flatus (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.43 to -0.19; P = 0.000); time to bowel movement (WMD, -0.51; 95% CI, -0.73 to -0.29; P = 0.000); and length of stay (WMD, -0.72; 95% CI, -1.02 to -0.43; P = 0.000) were significantly reduced in the treatment group. However, both of these results demonstrated significant heterogeneity. No evidence of publication bias was observed. Cumulative meta-analysis showed that chewing gum reduces duration of postoperative ileus that has been available for over 6 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of the meta-analysis suggest that chewing gum following abdominal surgery offers benefits in reducing the time of postoperative ileus.