Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27588405›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2016

Meta-analysis comparing chewing gum versus standard postoperative care after colorectal resection.

Guo-Min Song, Yong-Hong Deng, Ying-Hui Jin, Jian-Guo Zhou, Xu Tian

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06579339 (Efficacy of Chewing Xylitol Gum on Restoring Postoperative Bowel Activity After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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.

NCT06579339 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of Chewing Xylitol Gum on Restoring Postoperative Bowel Activity After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Three-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorGiresun UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled75ConditionsXylitol Gum Chewing, Non-xylitol Gum Chewing, Control GroupArmsxylitol chewing gum
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Chewing gum prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the intensive care unit: a pilot randomised controlled trial.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Guo-Min SongDepartment of Nursing, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin 300211, China.
Yong-Hong DengSchool of Nursing, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China.
Ying-Hui JinSchool of Nursing, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, China.
Jian-Guo ZhouDepartment of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi 563000, China.
Xu TianDepartment of Nursing, Chongqing Cancer Institute, Chongqing 400020, China.
Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChongqing Cancer Hospital · CNTianjin Hospital · CNZunyi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious incomplete studies investigating the potential of chewing gum (CG) in patients undergoing colorectal resection did not obtain definitive conclusions. This updated meta-analysis was therefore conducted to evaluate the effect and safety of CG versus standard postoperative care protocols (SPCPs) after colorectal surgery.

resultsTotal 26 RCTs enrolling 2214 patients were included in this study. The CG can be well-tolerated by all patients. Compared with SPCPs, CG was associated with shorter time to first flatus (weighted mean difference (WMD) -12.14 (95 per cent c.i. -15.71 to -8.56) hours; P < 0.001), bowl movement (WMD -17.32 (-23.41 to -11.22) hours; P < 0.001), bowel sounds (WMD -6.02 (-7.42 to -4.63) hours; P < 0.001), and length of hospital stay (WMD -0.95 (-1.55 to -0.35) days; P < 0.001), a lower risk of postoperative ileus (risk ratio (RR) 0.61 (0.44 to 0.83); P = 0.002), net beneficial and quality of life. There were no significant differences between the two groups in overall complications, nausea, vomiting, bloating, wound infection, bleeding, dehiscence, readmission, reoperation, mortality. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe potentially eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CG with SPCPs for colorectal resection were searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Wanfang databases through May 2016. The trial sequential analysis was adopted to examine whether a firm conclusion for specific outcome can be drawn.

conclusionsCG is benefit for enhancing return of gastrointestinal function after colorectal resection, and may be associated with lower risk of postoperative ileus.

Indexed as

Chewing GumColorectal SurgeryPostoperative CareAdultAgedFemaleHumansIleusMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsChewing Gumchewing gumcolorectal surgerymeta-analysispostoperative ileustrial sequential analysis

Identifiers

PMID27588405
PMCPMC5342535
OpenAlexW2518227785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.