Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31508999›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2020

Preoperative oral antibiotic bowel preparation in elective resectional colorectal surgery reduces rates of surgical site infections: a single-centre experience with a cost-effectiveness analysis.

B Vadhwana, A Pouzi, G Surjus Kaneta, V Reid, D Claxton, L Pyne, R Chalmers, A Malik, D Bowers, T Groot-Wassink

Open access · greenAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

B VadhwanaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
A PouziDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
G Surjus KanetaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
V ReidDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
D ClaxtonDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
L PyneDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
R ChalmersDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
A MalikDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
D BowersDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
T Groot-WassinkDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
Ipswich Hospital · GBUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical site infections cause considerable postoperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the effect on surgical site infection rates following introduction of a departmental oral antibiotic bowel preparation protocol.

methodsA prospective single-centre study was performed for elective colorectal resections between May 2016-April 2018; with a control group with mechanical bowel preparation and treatment group with oral antibiotic bowel preparation (neomycin and metronidazole) and mechanical bowel preparation. The primary outcome of surgical site infection and secondary outcomes of anastomotic leak, length of stay and mortality rate were analysed using Fisher's exact test and independent samples

resultsA total of 311 patients were included; 156 in the mechanical bowel preparation group and 155 in the mechanical bowel preparation plus oral antibiotic bowel preparation group. The study included 180 (57.9%) men and 131 (42.1%) women with a mean age of 68 years. There was a significant reduction in surgical site infection rates (mechanical bowel preparation 16.0% vs mechanical bowel preparation plus oral antibiotic bowel preparation 4.5%;

conclusionOral antibiotic bowel preparation is a feasible and cost-effective intervention shown to significantly reduce the rates of surgical site infection and length of stay in elective colorectal surgery.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisColonic DiseasesCost-Benefit AnalysisElective Surgical ProceduresEnglandFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansLength of StayMaleAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibioticsColorectal surgerySurgical site infection

Identifiers

PMID31508999
PMCPMC6996415
OpenAlexW2972677224

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.