Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27324152›Full record

ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2016

Benefit of mechanical bowel preparation prior to elective colorectal surgery: current insights.

A C A Murray, R P Kiran

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

A C A MurrayDivision of Colorectal Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, Herbert Irving Pavilion, 161 Fort Washington Avenue, Floor 8, New York City, 10032, NY, USA.
R P KiranDivision of Colorectal Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, Herbert Irving Pavilion, 161 Fort Washington Avenue, Floor 8, New York City, 10032, NY, USA. rpk2118@cumc.columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBack in the 1970s, the administration of oral antibiotics combined with mechanical bowel preparation prior to colorectal surgery was considered standard procedure and adopted widely. Subsequent evidence suggested that bowel cleansing was unnecessary, even harmful, and hence was abandoned. Most recent evidence, however, suggests that full preparation significantly improves a spectrum of colectomy-specific postoperative outcomes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to describe existing literature regarding the optimal bowel preparation regimen prior to elective colorectal resection. In addition, we evaluate the available evidence on each component-oral antibiotics, mechanical bowel preparation and intravenous antibiotics, with regard to short-term postoperative outcomes.

conclusionsCurrent best evidence suggests that colorectal resection should be preceded by a combination of oral antibiotics, mechanical bowel preparation and intravenous antibiotics at induction. Further randomized controlled trials are required due to a paucity of level 1 evidence.

Indexed as

Preoperative CareColectomyElective Surgical ProceduresHumansPostoperative ComplicationsAnastomotic leakAntibioticsColorectal resectionMechanical bowel preparationPostoperative outcomesQualitySurgical site infection

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.