The role of mechanical bowel preparation before ileal urinary diversion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Advances in Bowel Preparation and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Open and Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery

Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent a major source of postoperative complications adversely impacting morbidity and mortality indices in surgical care. The discovery of antibiotics in the mid-20th century, and their ensuing use for preoperative antimicrobial bowel preparation and prophylaxis, drastically reduced the occurrence of SSIs providing a major tool to surgeons of various specialties, including urology. Because, the appropriate use of these antimicrobials is critical for their continued safety and efficacy, an understanding of the recommendations guiding their application is essential for all surgeons. Here, we comprehensively review these recommendations with a focus on open and laparoscopic urologic surgeries.

Assessment of mechanical bowel preparation prior to nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery era: insights from a national database analysis in the United States

Purpose

This study was performed to evaluate the association between mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and perioperative outcomes following nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) era.

Methods

All partial and radical nephrectomies between 2019 and 2021 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were evaluated. Thirty-day perioperative outcomes were compared between groups where MBP was performed vs. not, in both the MIS and open surgery (OS) cohorts. A propensity score matching technique was utilized within MIS cases to control for covariates. The chi-square and t tests were used to determine significance.

Results

A total of 11,869 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of these, 8,204 (69.1%; comprising 65.3% robotic and 34.7% laparoscopic) underwent MIS, while 3,655 (30.9%) underwent OS. The rate of MBP was higher in the MIS group (16.0% vs. 10.0%, p < 0.001). Within the MIS group, MBP was associated with reduced rates of postoperative ileus (0.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.02), while other complications were comparable. Propensity score matching showed no association between MBP and postoperative ileus. However, a lower rate of 30-day readmission in the MBP group became statistically significant (4.4% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.01). Conversely, patients in the MBP group also demonstrated higher rates of pneumonia (1.29% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.002) and pulmonary embolism (0.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) after matching.

Conclusion

MBP practice prior to nephrectomy is infrequent in both OS and MIS cases, with minor differences in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing MIS. Routine MBP should continue to be excluded from the standard of care for nephrectomy in the MIS era.

Detailed Description of the Karolinska Technique for Intracorporeal Studer Neobladder Reconstruction

In the last two decades, surgical techniques for intracorporeal urinary diversion have been developed with the aim of reducing surgical morbidity. Although increasing constantly, the numbers of urologists offering intracorporeal neobladder reconstruction remain limited due to the complex nature of the procedure. In this article, we aim to provide a detailed description of the surgical technique we currently use at our institution. This technique was initially developed and perfected at the Karolinska Institutet in Sweden starting in 2003. It is a reproducible surgical approach with standardized and well-defined surgical steps. We give a detailed description of the surgical steps and provide tips and tricks to address specific situations and to increase efficiency. We also review the indications, the preoperative considerations, equipment necessary, postoperative considerations, and clinical outcomes for this procedure. Finally, we provide an accompanying didactic surgical video. We believe that this standardized approach can be learned and reproduced safely by motivated robotic surgeons.

Current practice patterns in the perioperative management of patients undergoing radical cystectomy: Results from a global survey

OBJECTIVE

To determine current practice patterns and adherence to various components of enhanced recovery after surgery in cystectomy (ERAC) protocol for peri-operative management of radical cystectomy patients through a global survey.

METHODS

A survey containing 25 questions and addressing 15 of the 22 items of the ERAC protocol was developed and disseminated through Email to the urologists with recent bladder cancer publications. The mailing list was generated by retrieving Email-ids of corresponding authors of articles using the keyword "cystectomy" in Scopus from January 2018 to October 2020.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 443 respondents across the globe. About 51.5% of respondents used some form of bowel preparation. A minority used carbohydrate loading (29.8%) and Alvimopan (13.3%). A short duration of nil by mouth was practised by 28.9%. For antibiotic prophylaxis, 51.7% used one, and 42% used two antibiotics. Duration of antibiotics was 24 hours, 48 hours, and >48 hours for 47.6%, 16.9%, and 35.4%, respectively. For peri-operative analgesia, 43.6% used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 9.3% opioids and 40.6% combination of both. Pharmacological thrombo-prophylaxis was routinely used by 74.7% respondents. There was significant variability in ERAC and non-ERAC components according to region of practice; The open surgical approach was most commonly used in Africa (92%), whereas it was the robotic approach in North America (or America?) (41%). The use of bowel preparation was higher in Asia (58%) and Africa (65%). Alvimopan use was more common in North America (58%). Most used 1 or 2 prophylactic antibiotics but the duration was shorter (<24 hours) in the Americas and European (58%-83%) compared to Asia and Africa (15%-35%).

CONCLUSION

There is high variability in the use of different ERAC components. Other than the timely removal of the abdominal drain and the use of thromboprophylaxis, the overall adherence of ERAC components is low.

A comparison between limited bowel preparation and comprehensive bowel preparation in radical cystectomy with ileal urinary diversion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Our aim is to evaluate the value of limited bowel preparation (LBP) in radical cystectomy (RC) with ileal urinary diversion (IUD).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on electronic database up to February 2020. All data were analyzed using RevMan5 (version 5.3). A subgroup analysis comparing the efficacy of CBP and no bowel preparation (NBP) was also performed.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 743 patients were finally enrolled for statistical analysis. According to the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between LBP group and comprehensive bowel preparation (CBP) group, concerning operative time (p = 0.79), length of stay (p = 0.46), the time to first toleration of clear liquids (p = 0.95), and overall complications (p = 0.29). However, the time to first bowel activity (SMD: - 0.77, 95% CI - 1.47 to - 0.07, p = 0.03), risk of fever (RR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85, p = 0.008), time to first flatus (SMD: - 1.06, 95% CI - 2.02 to - 0.10, p = 0.03), and risk of wound healing disorders (RR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.95, p = 0.03) were significantly lower in LBP group compared with CBP group. Subgroup analysis showed a significant lower risk of wound healing disorders in favor of NBP (RR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicated that LBP protocols might accelerate recovery of gastrointestinal function, promote wound healing, and reduce the risk of fever without increasing complications in patients undergoing RC with IUD. Besides, bowel preparation also did not hinder wound healing. Further, well-designed RCTs conducted by experienced surgeons are warranted before making the final clinical guidelines.

Does Mechanical Bowel Preparation Ameliorate Surgical Performance in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) improve surgical performance and decrease operative complications in anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).

METHODS

This study involved a retrospective analysis of 48 consecutive patients who underwent ALIF with MBP and a control cohort of 50 consecutive patients who underwent the same surgeries without MBP. The quality of each surgical procedure, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative complications, changes in vital signs and patient symptoms on the day of surgery, and bowel function postoperatively were also compared between the procedures.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups (all Ps > .05). The quality of each procedure, operative time, EBL, intraoperative complications, and changes in body temperature and heart rate were not different between the groups (all Ps > .05). The MBP group showed more headache, tiredness, thirst, and abdominal discomfort (all Ps < .001) and decrease of the systolic blood pressure (P = .041) on the day of surgery. The return of bowel movement was not different between the groups (P = .278).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the similar surgical result with the substantial patient discomfort, MBP can be omitted in ALIF.

Development of a postoperative care pathway for children with renal tumors

PURPOSE

To identify the factors associated with a shorter postoperative stay, as an initial step to develop a care pathway for children undergoing extirpative kidney surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This study retrospectively reviewed patients managed with upfront open radical nephrectomy for renal tumors between 2005 and 2016 at a pediatric tertiary care facility. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify factors associated with early discharge (by postoperative day 4).

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 28.1 months (range 1.8-193.1). Thirty-four (40.5%) patients had a nasogastric tube postoperatively. The patients were advanced to a clear liquid diet on a median postoperative day 2 (range 0-7) and regular diet on a median postoperative day 3 (range 1-8). Median time from surgery to discharge was 5 days (range 2-12), with 38 (45.2%) discharged early. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that earlier resumption of regular diet (OR 0.523, P = 0.028) was positively associated with early discharge. Other analyzed factors were not significant (see Table).

DISCUSSION

Timely initiation of adjuvant therapy is a specific requirement of Children's Oncology Group (COG) protocols. Chemotherapy and radiation therapy are ideally initiated simultaneously, as early as possible, within 2 weeks of surgery. Thus, factors that can facilitate early discharge from the hospital can maximize protocol adherence with respect to timing of adjuvant therapy initiation and optimize patient outcome. This study shed light on several postoperative factors and how these relate to postoperative stay and recovery. Specifically, tumor size, pre-operative bowel preparation, extent of lymph node sampling, stage, operative time, estimated blood loss, surgical service, postoperative nasogastric tube use, transfusion, and chemotherapy prior to discharge were not associated with discharge timing. Early re-feeding was associated with early discharge. Thus, it seems reasonable that, when developing a postoperative care pathway for these patients, these factors be considered and specifically encourage early re-feeding. In pediatrics, data on early recovery after surgery protocols are limited, and high-quality studies are unavailable. Within pediatric urology, early recovery after surgery protocols in children undergoing major urologic reconstruction have been shown to reduce hospital stay and can decrease complication rates. It seems reasonable that a similar pathway can be applied to children undergoing radical nephrectomy for suspected malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

For children with renal tumors who underwent radical nephrectomy, early re-feeding was associated with a shorter time to discharge. Use of bowel preparation and nasogastric tube did not appear to shorten time to discharge. These data are important for developing postoperative care pathways for these patients.

Impact of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis

AIM

To analyse the effect of mechanical bowel preparation vs no mechanical bowel preparation on outcome in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing adult patients receiving mechanical bowel preparation with those receiving no mechanical bowel preparation, subdivided into those receiving a single rectal enema and those who received no preparation at all prior to elective colorectal surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 36 studies (23 randomised controlled trials and 13 observational studies) including 21568 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery were included. When all studies were considered, mechanical bowel preparation was not associated with any significant difference in anastomotic leak rates (OR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.74 to 1.10, P = 0.32), surgical site infection (OR = 0.99, 95%CI: 0.80 to 1.24, P = 0.96), intra-abdominal collection (OR = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.63 to 1.17, P = 0.34), mortality (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.57 to 1.27, P = 0.43), reoperation (OR = 0.91, 95%CI: 0.75 to 1.12, P = 0.38) or hospital length of stay (overall mean difference 0.11 d, 95%CI: -0.51 to 0.73, P = 0.72), when compared with no mechanical bowel preparation, nor when evidence from just randomized controlled trials was analysed. A sub-analysis of mechanical bowel preparation vs absolutely no preparation or a single rectal enema similarly revealed no differences in clinical outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

In the most comprehensive meta-analysis of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery to date, this study has suggested that the use of mechanical bowel preparation does not affect the incidence of postoperative complications when compared with no preparation. Hence, mechanical bowel preparation should not be administered routinely prior to elective colorectal surgery.

The use of mechanical bowel preparation in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

The use of mechanical bowel preparation prior to laparoscopy is common in gynecology, but its use may affect the rates of perioperative events and complications. Our objective was to compare different mechanical bowel preparations using decision analysis techniques to determine the optimal preparation prior to laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

A decision analysis was constructed modeling perioperative outcomes with the following mechanical bowel preparations: magnesium citrate, sodium phosphate, polyethylene glycol, enema, and no bowel preparation. Comparisons were made using published utility values. Secondary analyses included the percentages that had 1 or more preoperative events and 1 or more intra- or postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Overall, the highest utility values were for no bowel preparation (0.98) and magnesium citrate (0.97), whereas the other values were as follows: enema (0.95), sodium phosphate (0.94), and polyethylene glycol (0.91). The difference between no bowel preparation and magnesium citrate was less than the published minimally important differences for utilities, so there is likely no real difference between these strategies. The probability of having at least 1 preoperative event was lowest for no bowel preparation (1%), whereas the probability of having at least 1 intra- or postoperative complication was lowest with magnesium citrate (8%).

CONCLUSION

The highest utilities were seen with no bowel preparation, but the absolute difference between no bowel preparation and magnesium citrate was less than the minimally important difference. With similar overall utilities, our model raises questions as to whether mechanical bowel preparation is a necessary step prior to laparoscopic gynecological surgery. However, if a surgeon prefers a bowel preparation, magnesium citrate is the preferred option.

Radical Cystectomy Perioperative Care Redesign

OBJECTIVE

To present an evidence-based review of the perioperative management of the radical cystectomy (RC) patient in the context of a care redesign initiative.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the key factors associated with perioperative management of the RC patient was completed. PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane databases were queried via a computerized search. Specific topics were reviewed within the scope of the three major phases of perioperative management: preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative. Preference was given to evidence from prospective randomized trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Preoperative considerations to improve care in the RC patient should include multi-disciplinary medical optimization, patient education, and formal coordination of care. Efforts to mitigate the risk of malnutrition and reduce postoperative gastrointestinal complications may include carbohydrate loading, protein nutrition supplementation, and avoiding bowel preparation. Intraoperatively, a fluid and opioid sparing protocol may reduce fluid shifts and avoid complications from paralytic ileus. Finally, enhanced recovery protocols including novel medications, early feeding, and multi-modal analgesia approaches are associated with earlier postoperative convalescence.

CONCLUSION

RC is a complex and morbid procedure that may benefit from care redesign. Evidence based quality improvement is integral to this process. We hope that this review will help guide further improvement initiatives for RC.

Modern Guidelines for Bowel Preparation and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Open and Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and antibiotics (oral and/or intravenous) have historically been used to decrease infectious complications in surgeries that involve manipulation of bowel or potential risk of injury. The use of MBP has recently been challenged in the colorectal surgery literature, thus inspiring similar critical evaluation of our practices in urology. This review gives a brief overview of the history of mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation, as well as the evolution of the practice trends in colorectal surgery and urology. We also examine contemporary guidelines in skin preparation as well as antimicrobial prophylaxis before surgery.

Is mechanical bowel preparation still necessary for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery? A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

A number of studies have proven that mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has no benefits in elective colorectal surgery. However, studies specifically related to gynecologic laparoscopic surgery are scant. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the necessity of MBP before gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently extracted data from each study. The primary outcome of interest was the quality of surgical field. Secondary outcomes of interest included postoperative pain, abdominal swelling, nausea/vomiting, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Three studies involving 372 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that MBP did not significantly increase the overall quality of surgical field exposure (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-1.49; P = 0.52). MBP also did not appear to significantly change the mean scores of postoperative pain (weighted mean difference, 0.09; 95%CI, -0.54-0.71; P = 0.79), the incidence of nausea/vomiting (odds ratio, 1.56; 95%CI, 0.80 to 3.03; P = 0.19), the mean scores of abdominal swelling (weighted mean difference, -0.26; 95%CI, -0.83-0.30; P = 0.36), and length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, 0.05; 95%CI, -0.13-0.22; P = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that routine use of MBP for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery should not be recommended. However, additional randomized controlled trials using large samples are needed to confirm these findings.