SynthesisUpdates in surgery2019
Effectiveness of mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation on anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk and protective factors for postoperative anastomotic leakage in esophageal and gastrointestinal surgery: an umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation in paediatric bowel surgery on postoperative wound related complications: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- The role of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics in prevention of anastomotic leakage following restorative resection for primary rectal cancer - a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- Early anastomotic complications in colorectal surgery: a systematic review of techniques for endoscopic salvage.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Anastomotic Leak Following Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026Review
- The Interplay Between the Gut Microbiota and Colorectal Cancer: A Review of the Literature.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- The Impact of Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotics in Colorectal Cancer Surgery (MECCA Study): A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- How to reduce the colorectal anastomotic leakage? The MIRACLe protocol experience in a cohort in a single high-volume centre.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Review
- Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): a cross-sectional survey.Pleura and peritoneum · 2021Article
- Role of mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation in children with Hirschsprung's disease undergoing colostomy closure and pull-through.Translational pediatrics · 2021Article
- Intestinal Microbiota in Colorectal Cancer Surgery.Cancers · 2020Review
- Article
- [Oral antibiotic prophylaxis for bowel decontamination before elective colorectal surgery : Current body of evidence and recommendations].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Review
- Bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: back to the future?Updates in surgery · 2019Article
- Risk Factors and Preventive Measures for Anastomotic Leak in Colorectal Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been a standard practice to perform mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) prior to colorectal surgery to reduce the risk of colorectal anastomotic leakages (CAL). The latest Cochrane systematic review suggests there is no benefit for MBP in terms of decreasing CAL, but new studies have been published. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to update current evidence for the effectiveness of preoperative MBP on CAL in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Consequently, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL were searched from 2010 to March 2017 for randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared the effects of MBP in colorectal surgery on anastomotic leakages. The outcome CAL was expressed in odds ratios and analysed with a fixed-effects analysis in a meta-analysis. Quality assessment was performed by the cochrane risk of bias tool and grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Eight studies (1065 patients) were included. The pooled odds ratio showed no significant difference of MBP in colorectal surgery on CAL (odds ratio (OR) = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.68-1.94). According to GRADE methodology, the quality of the evidence was low. To conclude, MBP for colorectal surgery does not lower the risk of CAL. These results should, however, be interpreted with caution due to the small sample sizes and poor quality. Moreover, the usefulness of MBP in rectal surgery is not clear due to the lack of stratification in many studies. Future research should focus on high-quality, adequately powered RCTs in elective rectal surgery to determine the possible effects of MBP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.