Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33579260›Full record

ReviewBMC surgery2021

The gut microbiota and colorectal surgery outcomes: facts or hype? A narrative review.

Annamaria Agnes, Caterina Puccioni, Domenico D'Ugo, Antonio Gasbarrini, Alberto Biondi, Roberto Persiani

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07050485 (Postbiotics for Mitigation of Postoperative Dysbiosis in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07050485 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Postbiotics for Mitigation of Postoperative Dysbiosis in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Randomized, Single-blinded, Placebo-controlled Trial (REPOT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of South FloridaRan2025 to 2026Enrolled30ConditionsColon Cancer, Gastrointestinal CancerArmsPoZibio, Inert placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Probiotics in Postoperative Pain Management.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Annamaria Agnes *Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Caterina Puccioni *Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Domenico D'UgoUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Antonio GasbarriniUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Alberto BiondiUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy. biondi.alberto@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2470-7858
Roberto PersianiUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito n.1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe gut microbiota (GM) has been proposed as one of the main determinants of colorectal surgery complications and theorized as the "missing factor" that could explain still poorly understood complications. Herein, we investigate this theory and report the current evidence on the role of the GM in colorectal surgery.

methodsWe first present the findings associating the role of the GM with the physiological response to surgery. Second, the change in GM composition during and after surgery and its association with colorectal surgery complications (ileus, adhesions, surgical-site infections, anastomotic leak, and diversion colitis) are reviewed. Finally, we present the findings linking GM science to the application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, for the use of oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation and for the administration of probiotics/synbiotics.

resultsAccording to preclinical and translational evidence, the GM is capable of influencing colorectal surgery outcomes. Clinical evidence supports the application of an ERAS protocol and the preoperative administration of multistrain probiotics/synbiotics. GM manipulation with oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation still has uncertain benefits in right-sided colic resection but is very promising for left-sided colic resection.

conclusionsThe GM may be a determinant of colorectal surgery outcomes. There is an emerging need to implement translational research on the topic. Future clinical studies should clarify the composition of preoperative and postoperative GM and the impact of the GM on different colorectal surgery complications and should assess the validity of GM-targeted measures in effectively reducing complications for all colorectal surgery locations.

Indexed as

Colorectal SurgeryEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryGastrointestinal MicrobiomeProbioticsAnastomotic LeakAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisColonic DiseasesDigestive System Surgical ProceduresElective Surgical ProceduresHumansPostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative CareSurgical Wound InfectionAnti-Bacterial AgentsMicrobiota; colorectal surgery; anastomotic leakOral antibiotic preparationSurgical site infections

Identifiers

PMID33579260
PMCPMC7881582
OpenAlexW3126852185

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.