Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32740871›Full record

ReviewArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2020

Controversies in preoperative bowel preparation in gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery: a review of the literature.

Michail Diakosavvas, Nikolaos Thomakos, Dimitrios Haidopoulos, Michael Liontos, Alexandros Rodolakis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Michail DiakosavvasGynecologic Oncology Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 80 Vasilissis Sofias Avenue, 11528, Athens, Greece. mdiakosavvas@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1104-7739
Nikolaos ThomakosGynecologic Oncology Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 80 Vasilissis Sofias Avenue, 11528, Athens, Greece.
Dimitrios HaidopoulosGynecologic Oncology Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 80 Vasilissis Sofias Avenue, 11528, Athens, Greece.
Michael LiontosDepartment of Clinical Therapeutics, School of Medicine, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 80 Vasilissis Sofias Avenue, 11528, Athens, Greece.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7192-4575
Alexandros RodolakisGynecologic Oncology Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alexandra Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 80 Vasilissis Sofias Avenue, 11528, Athens, Greece.
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this review is to assess the impact of mechanical and oral antibiotics bowel preparation on surgical performance and to investigate their role before gynecologic surgical procedures regarding the infection rates. We also aim to study the updated evidence regarding the use of these different types of bowel preparation, as well as the current preoperative practice applied.

methodsAn extensive search of the literature was conducted with Medline/PubMed, and the Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews being used for our primary search.

resultsTo date, due to the conflicting guidelines by the scientific societies, surgeons do not use a specific pattern of bowel preparation regimen. There are no strong evidence supporting mechanical bowel preparation, but instead, in many cases, patients' adverse effects, both physiological and psychological have been noted. On the other hand, the combined use of oral antibiotic and mechanical bowel preparation has been proven beneficial in colorectal surgery in reducing postoperative morbidities.

conclusionBased on current literature, in gynecologic surgeries with minimal probability of intraluminal entry, a regimen without any bowel preparation should be applied. The combined administration of both mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation, or even the use of the oral antibiotics alone, should be preserved for cases of increased complexity, where bowel involvement is highly anticipated, such as in gynecologic oncology, as stated in the ERAS protocols. Nonetheless, further research specific to gynecologic surgery is required.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansPreoperative CareSurgical Wound InfectionAnti-Bacterial AgentsBowel preparationGynecologyMechanicalOral antibioticsSurgical site infections

Identifiers

PMID32740871
OpenAlexW3046724103

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.