The association of alvimopan treatment with postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery: A systematic review across different surgical procedures and contexts of perioperative care

Prucalopride and Bowel Function Post Gastrointestinal Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) contributes to morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Prucalopride, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist, may enhance bowel motility. This review assesses whether the perioperative use of prucalopride compared to placebo is associated with accelerated return of bowel function post gastrointestinal (GI) surgery.

METHODS

OVID, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched as of January 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prucalopride and placebo for prevention of PPOI in adult patients undergoing GI surgery. The primary outcomes were time to stool, time to flatus, and time to oral tolerance. The secondary outcomes were incidence of PPOI, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, adverse events, and overall costs. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework were used. An inverse variance random effects model was used.

RESULTS

From 174 citations, 3 RCTs with 139 patients in each treatment group were included. Patients underwent a variety of GI surgeries. Patients treated with prucalopride had a decreased time to stool (mean difference 36.82 hours, 95% CI 59.4 to 14.24 hours lower, I2 = 62%, low certainty evidence). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different (very low certainty evidence). Postoperative complications and adverse events could not be meta-analyzed due to heterogeneity; yet individual studies suggested no significant differences (very low certainty evidence).

DISCUSSION

Current RCT evidence suggests that prucalopride may enhance postoperative return of bowel function. Larger RCTs assessing patient important outcomes and associated costs are needed before routine use of this agent.

Wound dehiscence in enhanced recovery after open radical cystectomy: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis study to assess the outcome of enhanced recovery (ER) after radical cystectomy (RC) on wound dehiscence was performed. A comprehensive literature examination till January 2023 was implemented and 1457 linked studies were appraised. The picked studies contained 772 open RC subjects in the picked studies' baseline, 436 of them were enhanced recovery after RC, and 336 were open RC. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the consequence of enhanced recovery after RC on wound dehiscence after open RC by the dichotomous styles and a fixed or random model. The ER after RC caused significantly lower wound dehiscence (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.89, P = .02) with low heterogeneity (I2  = 46%) compared with open RC. The ER after RC caused significantly lower wound dehiscence compared with open RC. Thorough precaution should be taken when commerce with the consequences because a limited number of studies were found and selected for this meta-analysis.

Global cost of postoperative ileus following abdominal surgery: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Following abdominal surgery, postoperative ileus is a common complication significantly increasing patient morbidity and cost of hospital admission. This is the first systematic review aimed at determining the average global hospital cost per patient associated with postoperative ileus.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was performed from January 2000 to March 2023. Studies included compared patients undergoing abdominal surgery who developed postoperative ileus to those who did not, focusing on costing data. The primary outcome was the total cost of inpatient stay. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa assessment tool. Summary meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 2071 studies identified, 88 papers were assessed for full eligibility. The systematic review included nine studies (2005-2022), investigating 1 860 889 patients undergoing general, colorectal, gynaecological and urological surgery. These studies showed significant variations in the definition of postoperative ileus. Six studies were eligible for meta-analysis showing an increase of €8233 (95 per cent c.i. (5176 to 11 290), P < 0.0001, I2 = 95.5 per cent) per patient with postoperative ileus resulting in a 66.3 per cent increase in total hospital costs (95 per cent c.i. (34.8 to 97.9), P < 0.0001, I2 = 98.4 per cent). However, there was significant bias between studies. Five colorectal-surgery-specific studies showed an increase of €7242 (95 per cent c.i. (4502 to 9983), P < 0.0001, I2 = 86.0 per cent) per patient with postoperative ileus resulting in a 57.3 per cent increase in total hospital costs (95 per cent c.i. (36.3 to 78.3), P < 0.0001, I2 = 85.7 per cent).

CONCLUSION

The global financial burden of postoperative ileus following abdominal surgery is significant. While further multicentre data using a uniform postoperative ileus definition would be useful, reducing the incidence and impact of postoperative ileus are a priority to mitigate healthcare-related costs, and improve patient outcomes.

Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) are dedicated to ensuring high-quality innovative patient care for surgical patients by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus as well as minimally invasive surgery. The ASCRS and SAGES society members involved in the creation of these guidelines were chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery and enhanced recovery. This consensus document was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus and develop clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. While not proscriptive, these guidelines provide information on which decisions can be made and do not dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, healthcare workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. These guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient. This clinical practice guideline represents a collaborative effort between the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and was approved by both societies.