ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2025
Effect of oral antibiotic bowel preparation versus no preparation on surgical site infections in elective colorectal surgery: a randomized trial.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Oral antibiotics alone for bowel preparation in colorectal surgery: time to rethink tradition?Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurgical site infections (SSIs) represent a significant cause of morbidity following colorectal surgery. While mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics is known to reduce SSIs, the independent effect of oral antibiotics alone remains unclear. This study compared the efficacy of oral antibiotic bowel preparation (OABP) versus no bowel preparation (NBP) in reducing SSIs among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.
methodsA prospective, randomized, double-blinded trial was performed at a tertiary care center in India. Eighty-six patients scheduled for elective colorectal surgery were randomized to receive either OABP (oral ciprofloxacin and metronidazole) or placebo, in addition to standard intravenous antibiotics. The primary outcome was the rate of SSIs. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak, length of hospital stay, overall morbidity, and readmission rates.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. The incidence of SSI was significantly lower in the OABP group compared to the NBP group (14.0% vs. 41.9%, P<0.01). The severity of infections and postoperative complications was also reduced in the OABP group (P<0.01). Although rates of anastomotic leak, readmission, and reoperation were higher in the NBP group, these differences were not statistically significant. The mean duration of hospital stay was shorter for patients in the OABP group (8.09 days vs. 11.28 days, P<0.01). No adverse effects related to oral antibiotics were observed.
conclusionOABP without mechanical cleansing significantly reduces SSIs, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay in elective colorectal surgery. This approach is safe and effective, offering a strategy to improve surgical outcomes.
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.