Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation on anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been a standard practice to perform mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) prior to colorectal surgery to reduce the risk of colorectal anastomotic leakages (CAL). The latest Cochrane systematic review suggests there is no benefit for MBP in terms of decreasing CAL, but new studies have been published. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to update current evidence for the effectiveness of preoperative MBP on CAL in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Consequently, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL were searched from 2010 to March 2017 for randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared the effects of MBP in colorectal surgery on anastomotic leakages. The outcome CAL was expressed in odds ratios and analysed with a fixed-effects analysis in a meta-analysis. Quality assessment was performed by the cochrane risk of bias tool and grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Eight studies (1065 patients) were included. The pooled odds ratio showed no significant difference of MBP in colorectal surgery on CAL (odds ratio (OR) = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.68–1.94). According to GRADE methodology, the quality of the evidence was low. To conclude, MBP for colorectal surgery does not lower the risk of CAL. These results should, however, be interpreted with caution due to the small sample sizes and poor quality. Moreover, the usefulness of MBP in rectal surgery is not clear due to the lack of stratification in many studies. Future research should focus on high-quality, adequately powered RCTs in elective rectal surgery to determine the possible effects of MBP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (2014) DICA-jaarrapportage 2014. Website DICA 2014.https://www.dica.nl/jaarrapportage-2014/assets/uploads/DSCA/DSCAbasistabel.pdf. Accessed 23 Feb 2017

  2. Eagye KJ, Nicolau DP (2009) Deep and organ/space infections in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery: incidence and impact on hospital length of stay and costs. Am J Surg 198:359–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Guenaga KF, Matos D, Castro AA et al (2003) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD001544

    Google Scholar 

  4. Snijders HS, Wouters MW, van Leersum NJ et al (2012) Meta-analysis of the risk for anastomotic leakage, the postoperative mortality caused by leakage in relation to the overall postoperative mortality. Eur J Surg Oncol 38:1013–1019

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Khan AA, Wheeler JM, Cunningham C et al (2008) The management and outcome of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 10:587–592

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chessin DB, Enker W, Cohen AM et al (2005) Complications after preoperative combined modality therapy and radical resection of locally advanced rectal cancer: a 14-year experience from a specialty service. J Am Coll Surg 200:876–882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Den Dulk M, Noter SL, Hendriks ER et al (2009) Improved diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 35:420–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hallböök O, Sjödahl R (1996) Anastomotic leakage and functional outcome after anterior resection of the rectum. Br J Surg 83:60–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nesbakken A, Nygaard K, Lunde OC (2001) Outcome and late functional results after anastomotic leakage following mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 88:400–404

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Law W, Choi HK, Lee YM et al (2007) Anastomotic leakage is associated with poor long-term outcome in patients after curative colorectal resection for malignancy. J Gastrointest Surg. 11:8–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mcardle CS, McMillan DC, Hole D (2005) Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term survival of patients undergoing curative resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 92:1150–1154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Walker KG, Bell SW, Rickard MJ et al (2004) Anastomotic leakage is predictive of diminished survival after potentially curative resection for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 240:255–259

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Hammond J, Lim S, Wan Y et al (2014) The burden of gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks: an evaluation of clinical and economic outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. 18:1176–1185

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Nichols RL, Condon RE (1971) Preoperative preparation of the colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 132:323–337

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Solla JA, Rothenberger DA (1990) Preoperative bowel preparation. A survey of colon and rectal surgeons. Dis Colon Rectum 33:154–159

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Beck D, Fazio VW (1990) Current preoperative bowel cleansing methods. Results of a survey. Dis Colon Rectum 33:12–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Markell KW, Hunt BM, Charron PD et al (2010) Prophylaxis and management of wound infections after elective colorectal surgery: a survey of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons membership. J Gastrointest Surg. 14:1090–1098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bucher P, Gervaz P, Soravia C et al (2005) Randomized clinical trial of mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation before elective left-sided colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 92:409–414

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Slim K, Vicaut E, Launay-Savary MV et al (2009) Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on the role of mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 249:203–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jung B, Påhlman L, Nyström PO et al (2007) Multicentre randomized clinical trial of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colonic resection. Br J Surg 94:689–695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bretagnol F, Panis Y, Rullier E et al (2010) Rectal cancer surgery with or without bowel preparation: the French GRECCAR III multicenter single-blinded randomized trial. Ann Sur 252:863–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Burke P, Mealy K, Gillen P et al (1994) Requirement for bowel preparation in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 81:907–910

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bucher P, Mermillod B, Gervaz P et al (2004) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg 139:1359–1364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Slim K, Vicaut E, Panis Y et al (2004) Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of colorectal surgery with or without mechanical bowel preparation. Br J Surg 91:1125–1130

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fa-Si-Oen P, Roumen R, Buitenweg J et al (2005) Mechanical bowel preparation or not? Outcome of a multicenter, randomized trial in elective open colon surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1509–1516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Contant CM, Hop WC, van’t Sant HP et al (2007) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 370:2112–2117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Frizelle FA, Colls BM (2005) Hyponatremia and seizures after bowel preparation: report of three cases. Dis Colon Rectum 48:393–396

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Beloosesky Y, Grinblat J, Weiss A et al (2003) Electrolyte disorders following oral sodium phosphate administration for bowel cleansing in elderly patients. Arch Intern Med 163:803–808

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gravante G, Caruso R, Andreani SM et al (2008) Mechanical bowel preparation for colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis on abdominal and systemic complications on almost 5000 patients. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:1145–1150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zmora O, Wexner SD, Hajjar L et al (2003) Trends in preparation for colorectal surgery: survey of the members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Am Surg 69:150–154

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Duxbury MS, Brodribb AJ, Oppong FC et al (2003) Management of colorectal cancer: variations in practice in one hospital. Eur J Surg Oncol 29:400–402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 62:1006–1012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Higgins J, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration. http://handbook.cochrane.org/. Accessed 28 Feb 2017

  34. Cooper H, Hedges L (1994) The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis, 2nd edn. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, p 632

    Google Scholar 

  35. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ et al (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Jørgensen L, Paludan-Müller AS, Laursen DRT et al (2016) Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Syst Rev 5:80

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. GRADE Working Group (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Guyatt G, Vist G, Falck-Ytter Y et al (2006) An emerging consensus on grading recommendations? ACP J Club 144:A8–A9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Schünemann HJ, Jaeschke R, Cook DJ et al (2006) An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 174:605–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. GRADE working group. (2012). What is GRADE? BMJ website. http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/x/set/static/ebm/learn/665072.html. Accessed 31 Mar 2017

  41. Bhat AH, Parray FQ, Chowdri NA et al (2016) Mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized study. Int J Surg Open 2:26–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bhattacharjee PK, Chakraborty S (2015) An open-label prospective randomized controlled trial of mechanical bowel preparation vs nonmechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: personal experience. Indian J Surg 77:1233–1236

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Beerdawood KA, Alhmoud FD, Namoura AAA et al (2014) Primary colorectal anastomosis, no preparation, no stoma needed. J Bahrain Med Soc 25:93–97

    Google Scholar 

  44. Saha AK, Chowdhury F, Jha AK et al (2014) Mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation before colorectal surgery: a randomized prospective trial in a tertiary care institute. J Nat Sci Biol Med 5:421–424

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Kim YW, Choi EH, Kim IY et al (2014) The impact of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score matching analysis. Yonsei Med J 55:1273–1280

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Tahirkheli M, Shukr I, Iqbal R (2013) Anastomotic leak in prepared versus unprepared bowel. Gomal J Med Sci 11:73–77

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sasaki J, Matsumoto S, Kan H et al (2012) Objective assessment of postoperative gastrointestinal motility in elective colonic resection using a radiopaque marker provides an evidence for the abandonment of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation. J Nippon Med Sch. 79:259–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. van’t Sant HP, Slieker JC, Hop WCJ et al (2012) The influence of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery for diverticulitis. Techn Coloproctol 16:309–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Hu Y, Li K, Li L et al (2017) Early outcomes of elective surgery for colon cancer with preoperative mechanical bowel preparation: a randomized clinical trial. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao 37:13–17

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Emir S, Kavlakoglu B, Yazar F (2012) Mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery: is it necessary? Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi 28(2):84–87

    Google Scholar 

  51. Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F et al (2011) Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD007635

    Google Scholar 

  52. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JA (2006) A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Stat Med 25:3443–3457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Anglemyer A, Horvath HT, Bero L (2014) Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:MR000034

    Google Scholar 

  54. Güenaga KF, Matos D, Wille-Jørgensen P (2011) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD001544

    Google Scholar 

  55. Cao F, Li J, Li F (2012) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:803–810

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Pineda CE, Shelton AA, Hernandez-Boussard T et al (2008) Mechanical bowel preparation in intestinal surgery: a meta-analysis and review of the literature. J Gastrointest Surg. 12:2037–2044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Wille-Jørgensen P, Guenaga KF, Matos D et al (2005) Pre-operative mechanical bowel cleansing or not? an updated meta-analysis. Color Dis. 7:304–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Scarborough JE, Mantyh CR, Sun Z et al (2015) Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces incisional surgical site infection and anastomotic leak rates after elective colorectal resection: an analysis of colectomy-targeted ACS NSQIP. Ann Surg 262:331–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Hwang GS, Hanna MH et al (2016) Risk factors for prolonged ileus following colon surgery. Surg Endosc 30:603–609

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kiran RP, Murray ACA, Chiuzan C et al (2015) Combined preoperative mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics significantly reduces surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, and ileus after colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 262:416–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Koller SE, Bauer KW, Egleston BL et al (2017) Comparative effectiveness and risks of bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 267:734–742. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Mahajna A, Krausz M, Rosin D et al (2015) Bowel preparation is associated with spillage of bowel contents in colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1626–1631

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Kind regards go to CLJJ Kruijtwagen, statistician of UMC Utrecht, for auditing the statistical procedures for the meta-analysis. The authors declare having received no support from any organisation for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Dokter van Heesweg 2, 8025 AB, Zwolle, The Netherlands

    Jobbe P. L. Leenen

  2. Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Judith E. K. R. Hentzen

  3. Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Henrietta D. L. Ockhuijsen

Authors
  1. Jobbe P. L. Leenen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judith E. K. R. Hentzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henrietta D. L. Ockhuijsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jobbe P. L. Leenen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not involve any studies with animals.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leenen, J.P.L., Hentzen, J.E.K.R. & Ockhuijsen, H.D.L. Effectiveness of mechanical bowel preparation versus no preparation on anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Updates Surg 71, 227–236 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0526-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0526-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation