SynthesisPediatric surgery international2025
Preoperative mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation for pediatric intestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has traditionally been routine before pediatric intestinal surgery, based on the belief that it reduces the risk of infection. In adults, benefits are only observed when MBP is combined with oral antibiotics; however, evidence in pediatrics remains limited and inconsistent.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD420251133552) following PRISMA 2020 and Cochrane guidelines, searching databases up to August 2025. Eligible studies included Randomized controlled trials and comparative observational cohorts comparing MBP with no MBP in elective Pediatric intestinal surgery. The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI); secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak (AL), intra-abdominal abscess (IAA), ileus, bowel obstruction, and length of stay (LOS). Random-effects models produced pooled estimates, and certainty was assessed using the GRADE approach.
resultsSeventeen studies involving 3,036 children were included. MBP showed no reduction in SSI, AL, or IAA, with moderate certainty for SSI and low certainty for AL/IAA due to rare events. MBP was associated with longer LOS and possible non-significant increases in ileus and obstruction.
conclusionCurrent evidence suggests that MBP offers no significant benefits in pediatric elective intestinal surgery and may even delay recovery. Within the framework of ERAS protocols, routine use of MBP appears unnecessary. However, MBP might still be required for specific functional or reconstructive indications. Further high-quality multicentre trials are essential before any definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding its discontinuation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41351639What 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.