Bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Open Fetal Spina Bifida Repair

INTRODUCTION

For open fetal spina bifida (fSB) repair, a maternal laparotomy is required. Hence, enhanced maternal recovery after surgery (ERAS) is paramount. A revision of our ERAS protocol was made, including changes in operative techniques and postoperative pain management. This study investigates eventual benefits.

METHODS

Our study included 111 women with open fSB repair at our center. The old protocol group (group 1) either received a transverse incision of the fascia with transection of the rectus abdominis muscle (RAM) or a longitudinal incision of the fascia without RAM transection, depending on placental location. The new protocol required longitudinal incisions in all patients (group 2). Postoperative pain management was changed from tramadol to oxycodone/naloxone. Outcomes of the two different protocol groups were analyzed and compared regarding the primary endpoint, the length of hospital stay (LOS) after fetal surgery, as well as regarding the following secondary endpoints: postoperative pain scores, day of first mobilization, removal of urinary catheter, bowel movement, and the occurrence of maternal and fetal complications.

RESULTS

Out of 111 women, 82 (73.9%) were in group 1 and 29 (26.1%) were in group 2. Women in group 2 showed a significantly shorter LOS (18 [14-23] days vs. 27 [18-39] days, p = 0.002), duration until mobilization (3 [2-3] days vs. 3 [3-4] days, p = 0.03), and removal of urinary catheter (day 3 [3-3] vs. day 4 [3-4], p = 0.004). Group 2 less often received morphine subcutaneously (0% vs. 35.4%, p < 0.001) or intravenously (0% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.02) but more often oxycodone (69.0% vs. 18.3%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were seen regarding pain scores, bowel movement, and maternal and/or fetal complications.

CONCLUSION

The new ERAS protocol that combined changes in surgical technique and pain medication led to better outcomes while reducing LOS. Continuous revisions of current ERAS protocols are essential to improve patient care continuously.

Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before benign laparoscopic or vaginal gynecologic surgeries.

DATA SOURCES

Database searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Sciences and citations and reference lists published up to December 2021.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials in any language comparing MBP with no preparation were included. Two reviewers independently screened 925 records and extracted data from 12 selected articles and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials tool. A random-effects model was used for the analysis. Surgeon findings (surgical field view, quality of bowel handling and bowel preparation), operative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, length of stay, surgical site infection), and patient's preoperative symptoms and satisfaction were collected.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Thirteen studies (1715 patients) assessing oral and rectal preparations before laparoscopic and vaginal gynecologic surgeries were included. No significant differences were observed with or without MBP on surgical field view (primary outcome, risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.05, p = .66, I2 = 0%), bowel handling (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95-1.08, p = .78, I2 = 67%), or bowel preparation. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in perioperative findings. MBP was associated with increased pain (mean difference [MD] 11.62[2.80-20.44], I2 = 76, p = .01), weakness (MD 10.73[0.60-20.87], I2 = 94, p = .04), hunger (MD 17.52 [8.04-27.00], I2 = 83, p = .0003), insomnia (MD 10.13[0.57-19.68], I2 = 82, p = .04), and lower satisfaction (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87, I2 = 76%, p = .002) compared with controls.

CONCLUSIONS

MBP has not been associated with improved surgical field view, bowel handling, or operative outcome. However, in view of the adverse effects induced, its routine use before benign gynecologic surgeries should be abandoned.

Comparative evaluation of enema alone and in combination with oral polyethylene glycol for bowel preparation before transvaginal pelvic floor reconstruction in elderly patients: a retrospective cohort study

The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the value of using an enema alone for mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before transvaginal pelvic floor reconstruction (TPFR) in patients ≥65 years old. In total, 190 patients were included [81 in the enema group vs. 109 in the enema + polyethylene glycol (PEG) group]. The levels of serum potassium (p = .004) and calcium (p = .005) were higher in the enema group after surgery. The decrease in serum calcium was more significant in the enema + PEG group (p = .027). More patients in the enema + PEG group developed hypokalaemia (p = .035) or hypocalcaemia (p = .008) after surgery. The incidence of thrombus and surgical site infection was similar and earlier bowel movement was evident in the enema group (p = .000). Overall, the enema group used more laxatives (p = .026). Using enema alone before TPFR reduces the incidence of electrolyte disturbances with no increase in surgical complications in elderly patients.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? TPFR is an effective treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in elderly women. Bowel preparation performed before gynecological surgery can reduce surgical site infection, but increase discomfort and electrolyte disturbance.What do the results of this study add? The levels of serum potassium and calcium were lower in the enema + PEG group than in the enema group after surgery and more patients developed hypokalaemia or hypocalcaemia in the enema + PEG group. The incidence of thrombus and surgical site infection was similar between the two groups. Bowel movement was earlier in the enema group.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or future research? Using enema alone before TPFR reduces the incidence of electrolyte disturbance and does not increase surgical complications. This conclusion needs to be confirmed by random controlled trial studies in the future.

Guidelines for vulvar and vaginal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society recommendations

This is the first collaborative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guideline for optimal perioperative care for vulvar and vaginal surgeries. An Embase and PubMed database search of publications was performed. Studies on each topic within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery vulvar and vaginal outline were selected, with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective cohort studies. All studies were reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. All recommendations on the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery topics are based on the best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented.