Abstract
Purpose
The role of laxatives after elective colorectal surgery is unclear, resulting in heterogenous guidelines and variability in clinical practice. This study aimed to gauge surgeons’ preferences and practice with regard to laxative use following elective colorectal surgery.
Methods
A short one-minute anonymous web-based questionnaire designed in English and Chinese (Mandarin) using the Research Electronic Data Capture application (REDCap) was distributed to member surgeons of every identifiable international colorectal specialist society via email communication, physical newsletters and social media channels. Frequency of laxative use after elective colorectal surgery, type of laxative used, and, if not used, the reasons for not using laxatives were collected.
Results
A total of 852 surgeons, representing 28 surgical societies completed the survey: 80% were colorectal surgeons and 20% were general surgeons with colorectal interest. Twenty-seven percent of the respondents routinely prescribed laxatives after colorectal surgery. There was wide variation in the type of laxatives used, with magnesium-based laxatives (42%), macrogol (Movicol, 36%) and lactulose (Duphalac, 22%) being the most common. Geographical location was correlated with choice of laxative. Those not routinely using laxatives stated the reasons as being no evidence for benefit (48%), potential of adverse events (24%), more than one reason (21%) and other (7%). The majority (93%) non-users would consider using laxatives if better evidence was available.
Conclusion
Most surgeons do not routinely prescribe laxatives after elective colorectal surgery due to lack of evidence. Amongst those surgeons who do use them, there is wide variability in the type of laxatives used.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00384-020-03521-1/MediaObjects/384_2020_3521_Fig1_HTML.png)
References
Okamoto A, Kohama K, Aoyama-Ishikawa M, Yamashita H, Fujisaki N, Yamada T, Yumoto T, Nosaka N, Naito H, Tsukahara K, Iida A, Sato K, Kotani J, Nakao A (2016) Intraperitoneally administered, hydrogen-rich physiologic solution protects against postoperative ileus and is associated with reduced nitric oxide production. Surgery 160(3):623–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.05.026
Scarborough JE, Schumacher J, Kent KC, Heise CP, Greenberg CC (2017) Associations of specific postoperative complications with outcomes after elective colon resection: a procedure-targeted approach toward surgical quality improvement. JAMA Surg 152(2):e164681. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4681
Goldstein J, Matuszewski K, Delaney C, Senagore A, Chiao E, Shah M, Meyer K, Bramley T (2007) Inpatient economic burden of postoperative ileus associated with abdominal surgery in the United States. P T 32(2):82–90
Dudi-Venkata NN, Kroon HM, Bedrikovetski S, Moore JW, Sammour T (2019) Systematic scoping review of enhanced recovery protocol recommendations targeting return of gastrointestinal function after colorectal surgery. ANZ J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.15319
Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O (2019) Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 43(3):659–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42(2):377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
Zingg U, Miskovic D, Pasternak I, Meyer P, Hamel CT, Metzger U (2008) Effect of bisacodyl on postoperative bowel motility in elective colorectal surgery: a prospective, randomized trial. Int J Color Dis 23(12):1175–1183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-008-0536-7
Andersen J, Christensen H, Pachler JH, Hallin M, Thaysen HV, Kehlet H (2012) Effect of the laxative magnesium oxide on gastrointestinal functional recovery in fast-track colonic resection: a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized study. Color Dis 14(6):776–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02796.x
Crebbin W, Beasley SW, Watters DA (2013) Clinical decision making: how surgeons do it. ANZ J Surg 83(6):422–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12180
Flin R, Youngson G, Yule S (2007) How do surgeons make intraoperative decisions? Qual Saf Health Care 16(3):235–239. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2006.020743
Clavien PA, Dindo D (2007) Surgeon’s intuition: is it enough to assess patients’ surgical risk? World J Surg 31(10):1909–1911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9145-9
Basse L, Madsen JL, Kehlet H (2001) Normal gastrointestinal transit after colonic resection using epidural analgesia, enforced oral nutrition and laxative. Br J Surg 88(11):1498–1500. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01916.x
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Mr. Gianluca Pellino (Y-SICCR) and to the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery SICCR for sending the survey across their society members.
Funding
This research is supported by RACS WG Norman Research Scholarship (RACS ID 187648) and Medtronic (Australia) Colorectal Research Fellowship Supplementary Scholarship (a1753714).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dudi-Venkata, N.N., Kroon, H.M., Bedrikovetski, S. et al. A global survey of surgeons’ preferences and practice with regard to laxative use after elective colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 35, 759–763 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03521-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03521-1